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 September 23, 2020, from around 12:00 to 12:40 of the same day, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business for about 40 minutes by force, such as, under the influence of alcohol at a restaurant operated by the victim C, the Defendant: (a) b; (b) dump the music with his mobile phone; (c) dumping the disturbance; and (d) dump the voice; and (c) hump the horses to the victim; and (d) hump, hump the horses to the customers in the restaurant; and (d) hump the voice, hump the voice, and hump the sound.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (related to the statements of the shots) in the written statements and written statements in C and D;

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

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Articles 44-2 and 2-3 of the Act on the Medical Treatment, Custody, etc., for the observation and treatment order;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the types of decisions] the scope of the recommended punishment [the scope of the punishment [the category 1] interference with the business affairs [the category 1] and no person who interferes with the business affairs [the area of recommendation and the scope of the punishment] [the scope of the recommended punishment], six months through one year and six months;

2. Since the decision of sentence was rendered in 2014 on three occasions, the person who was sentenced to a fine by interference with business affairs shall choose to imprisonment.

However, considering the fact that there is no criminal conviction or heavier punishment, and that there is a reflective error, considering the criminal history, criminal records, details of the crime, etc. of the defendant, it is judged that the defendant was addicted to drinking alcohol or addicted to it, and that the necessity of treatment and the risk of recidivism is recognized, it is ordered to undergo medical treatment related to alcohol dependence along with the protection observation.