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

1. On September 15, 2015, the Defendant, in preparation for fire prevention of existing buildings, followed the disturbance by: (a) the “E Eart” operated by D in Ischeon-si, Leecheon-si, did not properly indicate the price of both waves; and (b) the employees F was tightly and tightly controlled, and (c) the Defendant was f was suffering from the disturbance.

At around 19:52 of the same day, the Defendant sought to 2 litresses in the early stage fuel containing gasoline and lubric oil, which were kept in the Defendant’s house storage in Ischeon-si, G (No. 2) and to see in the above marina, and to see in the above Mart, 199, the Defendant attempted to spread the lux fuels into the both wave display team and the floor and the floor, and to put the lux oil into a single-use lux (No. 1) which was used in the lux hand, but H and ma employees were prevented, by cutting the lux, and did not reach the prevention of fire.

As a result, the Defendant prepared fire prevention with a view to setting fire to existing buildings such as D, multiple employees, and customers who find marinas.

2. Obstruction of business;

A. On April 1, 2015, the Defendant: (a) opened a package of 17:00 mar on the top of the mar on April 17:00; and (b) inserted 1 mar of rice in the 20km and mar of the mar to the employees of the victimized person who was in the mar of the mar and the mar of the mar of the mar. The Defendant

In this case, it was difficult to avoid a disturbance for about 30 minutes, such as the president of the balk of this Chewing one, the balk balk, which will bring about by double, so as to take the large sound.

B. On August 15, 2015, the Defendant received 9,500 won from the victim J, who was an employee in charge of calculation on the grounds that the poppy price differs from the poppy price at around 15:00 on August 1, 2015, and received 9,500 won in case of the carper.

It was difficult to avoid disturbance for about 10 minutes, such as taking a large amount of bath."

(c)

On September 8, 2015, the Defendant, at around 15:02, was an employee, on the ground that the price indication of the poppy was not well set at around 15:02.