On April 17, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to the obstruction of performance of official duties and the obstruction of business by the Seoul Southern District Court, and on October 14, 2015, the Defendant completed the execution of the said sentence.

On March 24, 2016, at around 21:40 on March 24, 2016, the Defendant: (a) expressed the victim’s Da (n, 43 years old); (b) expressed the victim’s desire not to set up credit card points as desired by the Defendant; and (c) obstructed the victim’s tasks and business tasks by force for about 20 minutes, such as bread, breth, etc. displayed on the above tasks, and boomed on the floor by pushing it over to the bottom.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records, investigation reports (Attachment of a copy of judgment), and personal identification and confinement status;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor concerning the relevant criminal facts;

1. The sentence shall be imposed in consideration of the reason for the sentencing of Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders [the scope of recommending punishment], the reason for the sentencing of Article 35 of the Criminal Act, taking into account the fact that there are many criminal records of identical repeated crimes [the decision of sentence] of the aggravated area (a year to three years and six months) (a special offender], and that they are repeated crimes.

However, the fact that a mistake is discovered, and the fact that an investigation agency voluntarily attends the investigation agency and responded to the investigation shall be determined by getting out of the lower limit of the recommended punishment in consideration of favorable circumstances.