1. Obstruction of business;

A. On May 9, 2017, the Defendant committed a crime around 12:25, May 12:25, 2017, 2017: (a) stated that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at “D Anstrecing point” operated by the Victim C (PP) located in Busan Jung-gu, and she was under the influence of the Victim C (PPP) for about 20 minutes, and obstructed the Victim’s safe-point business by force.

B. On May 9, 2017, around 15:20 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) found the vehicle at the above border points around 15:20 on the same day; and (b) stated, without any justifiable reason, that “I see, she only died, and she only she takes a large interest; and (c) interfered with the victim’s intra-point business by force.”

2. The Defendant assaulted the victim’s arms by taking the victim’s arms in knife and knife at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1(a).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (No. 7 No. 5 of the evidence list);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence) and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Although there was a history of being subject to multiple criminal punishment due to violent crimes on the grounds of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, the punishment for each of the of the of the of the of the of the instant crimes is not easy, taking into comprehensive account the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and the sentence is determined as ordered.