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

1. On October 15, 2014, at around 00:30 on October 15, 2014, the Defendant: (a) found in the D restaurant located in Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si; (b) demanded the victim F, the wife of E, and the victim G, the victim G, to drink the name of E at No. 3; and (c) the victim F, who drinks a restaurant, was not responsible to the victim F, and brought the victim F, to dispute with the victim F.

Accordingly, the Defendant was able to escape a 50-minute, such as breaking a beer and beer with beer with beer and beer with beer and beer with beer and satisf with beer.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the restaurant business of the cafeterias such as the victim F and G by force.

2. On the same day at around 01:35 of the same day, the Defendant received 112 reports to the above D restaurant, and sent out by the assistant I and the assistant J of the G District Police Station of the Kimhae Police Station of the G District to listen to the circumstances of the damage against the above 3 coper G et al., and the Defendant stated that “Choe chrop chrop? kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh kh k

Therefore, when the above slope I arrested the defendant in the crime of interference with business, the defendant was fluored, and the defendant was fluored to say that "the fluore fribb 925 the inspector's room 9.25" and the 112 report handling by the police officer and legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of the flagrant offender was obstructed by putting the fluor I in his hand the fluor of the above slope I in his hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the first protocol of trial;

1. Each police statement concerning I, F, and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of J;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act concerning the facts of crime and the point of obstructing each business of the choice of punishment: Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the obstruction of performance of official duties: Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The former part of Article 37 and Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. The suspended sentence of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing grounds shall be considered as favorable to the defendant).