1. On June 5, 2014, from around 05:00 to 05:35, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force by allowing customers entering the restaurant from entering the restaurant, by hearing the words “A” operated by the victim C of Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City from the name-free customers on the name-free customers on the side of the restaurant, and by gathering a large amount of lid from the above name-free customers, and by gathering the lids on the name-free customers on the part of the above name-free customers, the Defendant was unable to enter the restaurant, and thereby obstructing the victim’s restaurant business by force.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties by assaulting F’s chest at the same time and at the same place as the preceding paragraph, and by assaulting F’s breast at one time, f’s chest, and f’s breast at one’s own speech, and f’s breast, with a view to obstructing the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties relating to the investigation and maintenance of order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each police statement concerning C and F;

1. Partial statement of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant;

1. Application of CCTV Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes;

1. Since the sentencing guidelines are not set for the crime of interference with business in the holding, the sentencing guidelines do not apply to the crime in the holding that is a multiple crime.

2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol and obstructing the performance of official duties by assaulting the police officer dispatched to the Defendant after receiving a report on the crime. It is deemed inappropriate to transfer the type of crime acknowledged by the investigated evidence.

Therefore, the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment as ordered.