On October 12, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for a crime of assault at Suwon District Court, and completed the execution of the sentence in a female prison on November 20, 2016.

1. At around 15:30 on June 26, 2018, the Defendant: (a) in “D” restaurant operated by the victim C in Pyeongtaek-si B, the Defendant destroyed the repair cost of KRW 200,000 on the ground that the victim said that he would not sell alcohol to the Defendant under the influence of alcohol; (b) he saw the victim to go back; and (c) he collected the chair from the victim; and (d) damaged the victim’s glass window.

2. On August 23, 2018, around 14:05, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s mobile phone sales business by force by avoiding a disturbance for about 15 minutes in a large voice on the grounds that the victim G, who is an employee of Pyeongtaek-si E, was in an influent response due to the influence of the victim G, who was an employee, before the locking.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of C, G, and H;

1. All on-site photographs;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the personal confinement status, criminal records, and results of inquiry;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant on the grounds of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, even though the Defendant has agreed with the victims, in light of the criminal records (in particular, the same kind of power and the power of repeated crimes) of the Defendant, etc.