[200] [criminal power] On February 11, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court on August 12, 2011, and completed its execution in the area of mountainous district in the Daejeon Prison.

【Criminal Facts】

On July 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 03:39 on July 23, 2014, the Victim D operated by the Victim D in the Siljin-si Building, “Ea” F, an employee of F, was allowed to drink or enter the Defendant; (b) made it a large bath, fluencing him, flab, and flabed so far.

놨다 하는 등으로 소란을 피워 손님들을 그곳을 떠나게 함으로써 위력으로 피해자의 목욕탕 영업을 방해하였다.

In addition, the Defendant interfered with the victims’ work over 12 occasions from July 23, 2014 to September 24, 2014, as indicated in the annexed crime list, from around 03:39 to around 11:30 on September 24, 2014.

[2015 Highest 301]

1. At around 13:00 on November 16, 2014, the Defendant: (a) without any justifiable reason, expressed the victim’s Hadice restaurant operated by G by the victim H of the Siljin-si; (b) took the victim’s bath with the large voice “Chewing, the same year of the opening”; (c) taken the alcohol in the air conditioners at that place; (d) taken the alcohol in the air conditioners; and (e) demanded the customers to change the alcohol, thereby preventing the customers from entering the restaurant for about two hours.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

2. At around 05:00 on January 24, 2015, the Defendant: (a) 05:00, at the above Haba restaurant, the victim complained of the victim’s complaint that the Defendant reported the Defendant to the police station due to interference with his/her business; and (b) the victim tolds the victim “ how he/she reported to the police station, how much he/she would have born;” and (c) the victim was unable to enter the facility by exposing the disturbance for about 30 minutes, such as drinking alcohol in the cooling machine located therein, with the mind of mind.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

[2014 Highest 1200]

1. The defendant;