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

On December 19, 2017, the Defendant, at around 19:00, 19:00, was drinking at the D cafeteria operated by the victim C in Daegu-gu, Seo-gu, about one week, provided that he had a great desire for customers to see “I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am am, I am, I am, and I am, even after the victim requested other customers to see it.

Then, the Defendant got out of the restaurant to his employee's place, and was trying to enter the restaurant again, was prevented from entering the restaurant, and the Defendant she sing out of the restaurant, and she sing out of the restaurant entrance, she sing out, she sing out, sing out, and ring out, she sing out of the restaurant, she sing out, and laid out the part outside the entrance " sing out of the restaurant, etc.", and let the drinking customers get out of the restaurant.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force over about 20 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of six copies of the investigation report (on-site conditions, etc.), photographs, etc. to the statutes;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

In light of various circumstances, such as the background and means of the crime, the details of the crime, and the defendant's behavior before and after the crime committed by the above evidence, it cannot be deemed that the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime in this case, and thus, the above assertion by the defendant cannot be accepted.

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant has been punished for crimes related to drinking and violence.