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 May 23, 2018, at D operated by Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Victim C on May 23, 2018, the Defendant: (a) demanded the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Victim C to “D’s influence”; and (b) repeated entry into the main place to “the victim to interfere with his/her business”; (c) repeated entry into the main place to “the victim,” and “the victim, who has no walling.”

Hand did not appear to mean "the absence of a Handphone" as a large sound.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's main business for about 40 minutes by force.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, at the time, at the time, at the place specified in Paragraph 1, and at the same time, and at the place mentioned above, solicited the Defendant to invalid, and the police officer called out for the said reason, carried in franchis E by hand, carried in franchis, and francing franchis, and then " franchis, francing with the State franchis, acting together with the State franchis, and followed the franchis."

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with police officers' performance of duties on the prevention and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to C, E, and F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photograph by capturing a photograph or video;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the choice of imprisonment for each crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account the following: (a) one time criminal records of a fine due to the crime of violence with reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act; (b) the accused recognizes and reflects the crime; (c) the accused has no criminal records of a fine or heavier punishment; (d) the accused has no criminal records of a fine or heavier punishment; (e) the degree of interference with duties and interference with performance of official duties