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

At around 19:25 on December 3, 2013, at D convenience points where the victim C works in Seo-gu, Daegu, 2013. At around March of the same year, the Defendant expressed that the said convenience store proprietor reported the Defendant to the police as a obstruction of his duties, and expressed that “I am hicker and hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hicker’s hick, etc.’s hicker’s hicker’s hickt.’

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the convenience store business of the victim by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. Investigation report (as to the attachment of a criminal suspect's transfer report related to the same kind of crime), - Copy of the case transfer;

1. Investigation Report (as to attachment of photographs), - Application of photographic Acts and subordinate statutes on criminal scene.

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 314 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Suspension of execution shall be decided as per the disposition for not less than Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that the injured party seems not to have want the punishment of the accused);