However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On November 3, 2018, at around 21:00, the Defendant interfered with the business of the victim C’s operation on the first floor located in Busan metropolitan Daegu B, Busan, and obstructed the victim’s main business operation by force of approximately 26 minutes, such as fluence of the victim’s head and fluence of the victim’s head and fluence of the victim’s head and fluence of the victim’s main fluence.

2. Around 21:27 on the same day, the Defendant destroyed the victim C’s market price in a size of KRW 5,000 as the market price owned by 5,00, by breaking the table table, which was on the boom, with the table table attached to the above paragraph (1).

3. At around 21:35 on the same day, the Defendant assaulted the Defendant at the same place, and at the same time, at the 21:15 day, the Defendant obstructed the police officer’s legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the 112 reported case, by assaulting the Defendant, kneneneee F of F, who attempted to arrest a flagrant offender on the ground of the aforementioned suspicion.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning C and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (verification of alcoholic beverage payment capacity and fine collection);

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for probation and community service order include a majority of criminal records of the same kind, but the nature of the crime in this case is not weak, the defendant's age, character and behavior, such as the fact that the victim agreed with C, and it is against the victim C.