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

On May 23, 2014, at around 13:00, the Defendant Da-dong, operated by the victim C in Suwon-gu, Busan, performed driving and drinking in D cafeteria, and the Defendant was contacted that one of the Defendant’s daily activities was accompanied by the earth while driving.

The Defendant sought again in the above restaurant, and the victim expressed that “I will drink, here, that I will see that I will see their business interference. I will see that I will see. I will see. I will see that I will sing. I will sing. I will sing. I will sing. I will see. I will sing. I will see. I will sing. I will see that I will sing to enter the restaurant, which would be about 30 minutes of the disturbance, and that I would like to get customers who will enter the above restaurant.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol law to C

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., the violation and the point agreed with the victim) in the suspension of execution;

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;