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 August 21, 2017, from around 17:30 to 17:45 on the same day, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s guard duties by force, by means of force, such as obstructing the passage of the vehicle by installing a warning apparatus in front of the entrance shuttle, on the grounds that the said apartment security guard victim D, the victim E, and the victim E, could not interfere with the residents of the apartment.

2. The Defendant committed assault, at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1, to display the victims of the disturbance, such as the date and time set forth in paragraph 1, and at the time set forth in paragraph 1, used the victim D ( South, 65 years old) to 6-7 times to stop the disturbance, followed the victim E ( South, 71 years old) by several times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each written statement of D and E;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act (see Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do3505 decided Jun. 25, 2009; 201Do1895 decided Oct. 11, 2012)

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the observation of protection and observation, the punishment shall be determined by taking into account various circumstances shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, method and mode of committing a crime, and the circumstances before and after committing a crime.

- The highly reflectivity, the elderly of 68 years old that their health conditions are not good - previous convictions and non-agreements at several times;