around 06:25 on December 30, 2018, the Defendant: (a) opened a string door and opened a string door in Ansan-si B; and (b) cut off the 26,000 won of the market price under the custody of the victim D by inserting it into a vinyl.

around 10:00 on May 3, 2019, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force for about 3 hours, including:00, the Defendant 203, at the Syang-si E and the “G cafeteria” operated by the victim F, the Defendant 203, stating that “this son, inside, and outside, is known” to other customers who were eating, and the Defendant 200 hours off the floor at the entrance of the restaurant so that they may put the front of the restaurant so that they may not enter the restaurant and take a bath, thereby obstructing the victim’s restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

"2019 Highest 563"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of CCTV-recording data around the scene of damage) 2019No9903;

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 330 and 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. From among concurrent offenders, the reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment in accordance with the sentencing guidelines] - Interference with business - Night time buildings, intrusion larceny in general property (for June to June) in the basic area (for example, theft in general property) - Special mitigation area (for April to January 1 and June) - Special Mitigation area (for special mitigation), in cases where a person intrudes into places other than a living-type crime, indoor residential space (for example, four types), and the final sentencing range due to the aggravation of punishment: From June to December 3 (for the decision of sentencing), the defendant led to his confession and reflects all of the crimes.

The value of stolen goods is not significant and the victim wishes to take the action against the defendant.

However, the defendant has several times, including punishment for the same theft crime.