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.

On October 20, 2016, the Defendant was under the influence of around 21:00 on the “C main points” located in the East Sea B, and without any justifiable reason, the Defendant was unable to avoid disturbance for about one hour, such as she was under the influence of alcohol, for about one hour, such as “hump flap flap”, and she was off from the victim D (58 years of age, num) who is the owner of the said main shop, and she was under the control of the victim.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's main business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act and Article 314 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime; Selection of imprisonment;

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

1. The scope of sentencing guidelines by mutual agreement with victims that there are records of punishment several times due to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, violent crimes, and obstruction of business: Not more than eight months (in the area of interfering with business, interference with business, and mitigation of business), respectively;