except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On November 29, 2018, at around 18:00, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force by placing the victim C’s “D’s operation” restaurant located in the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and by placing the knife and the knife at the Gap’s own large interest, without any justifiable reason, in which the Defendant ordered the knife and the knife to put the knife at the bar and the knife, throwing the knife the knife with the knife, cutting the knife with the knife, cutting the knife with the knife, keeping the knife, kn

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (victim C telephone call);

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of imprisonment;

1. The Defendant committed a second offense on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, even though he/she was subject to suspended sentence for the same offense.

However, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account the various circumstances shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and would not repeat again, that the defendant agreed with the victim, that the degree of interference with business is not much serious, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.