except that the execution of a sentence shall be deferred for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On April 6, 2017, at around 05:30, the Defendant ordered the victim’s E-cafeteria operated by the victim D in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul, the Defendant ordered the victim to commit 2 misunderstandings in the amount equivalent to KRW 18,000 in the market value.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any money at the time of entering the above restaurant, so even if he was provided by the injured party, he did not have the intent or ability to pay the money.

Defendant deceiving the victim as above, and was provided 2 misunderstandings in the 18,000 won of the market price at the above time and place from the victim.

2. On April 6, 2017, from around 06:00 to around 07:00 on the same day, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s operation of the restaurant by force by having the customers listed in paragraph (1) take a bath, such as “salpering, commencing”, etc., while under the influence of alcohol to the customers who were on other tables, and take a noise, and making them enter the restaurant, and preventing them from entering the restaurant by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement (the sixth public trial date);

1. Written statements (F, D);

1. The scene of the case and photographs of the suspect;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation;

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the 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. The scope of sentencing recommended by the sentencing guidelines on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act: The scope of final sentencing following the aggravated punishment [the scope of recommending punishment] under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, which has no basic area (from June to January 1, 6) [the person subject to special sentencing] [the scope of recommending punishment] under Article 2 of the Act on the Grounds of No. 1 [the scope of recommending punishment] [the scope of business interference] under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, there are no basic area (from June to January 6] (the scope of recommending punishment] under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the person subject to special sentencing].