2.Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be postponed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The Defendant: (a) from around 15:30 on September 29, 2014 to around 17:30 on September 29, 2014, the Defendant: (b) performed drinking in the “E” restaurant operated by the victim D; and (c) ordered F, a customer, to do so to G, who is the victim’s wife; and (d) ordered F, to do so by stating that “F,” the said “I will do so in the same way as “I will do so in the same way, I will do so.” The Defendant ordered the said G to “I am on the floor,” but the said G refused, “I am the victim’s desire to do so.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's above restaurant business by force over approximately two hours.

2. From November 19, 2014, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force over about 30 minutes, as follows: (a) around 19:30 on November 19, 2014, at E-cafeteria operated by the victim D; (b) under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant allowed customers to take annoyed manner, and make it difficult to pass through by blocking the restaurant table.

Summary of Evidence

"2014 Highest 2547"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

2. Statement of the police statement concerning D;

3. "On-site photographs of 2015 Height12".

1. Defendant's legal statement;

2. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the relevant criminal facts;

2. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

3. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (the fact that an agreement is reached with the victim and that an elderly person and health is not good).

3. Probation under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;