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

On March 2, 2020, from around 22:40 to 00:30 of the following day, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s singing room business by force by: (a) the victim, who was in Jinju-si B (the 53 years of age), has broken the victim who demanded accounting, has sealed the victim who was frighting to alcohol; and (b) has pushed the powder on the hallway, having the corridor knife the knife and knife the knife of the knife, having the knife and knife the knife of the knife; and (c) preventing the customers from entering the singing room by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the list of receipts, photographs, and reported cases;

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

1. Suspension of execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation and community service order: The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of business obstruction according to the sentencing criteria (type 1) and the area subject to mitigation of business, one month to eight months in imprisonment;

2. The sentence was repeatedly punished for crimes involving violence, including the suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the decision of sentence.

However, the victim is not subject to punishment by mutual consent with the victim.