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

1. On January 6, 2015, from around 13:40 to around 15:10, the Defendant: (a) under the influence of alcohol in a restaurant with the trade name “D” operated by the victim C, which was operated by the Gangseo-gun Hongcheon-gun, the Defendant: (b) expressed the victim “I am to come to her seat”; and (c) made the victim feel a disturbance, such as “I am going to come to her seat”; and (d) returned to the said restaurant while going to her high character, the Defendant was unable to enter the said restaurant, thereby making the customers go away from her seat; and (e) prevented the customers who entered the said restaurant.

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

2. At around 15:10 on January 6, 2015, the Defendant: (a) 15:10, and at the place specified in paragraph (1), expressed a public bath to the head of the Hongcheon Police Station E District, who was sent to the site by the report of the said C, on the part of three persons, including G details belonging to the same district group, C, a restaurant operator, and H, who is a restaurant employee, who is an employee at the restaurant; (b) the Defendant took a public bath to the head of the Hongcheon Police Station E District E District, with the larger interest: (c) 15:10.

Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement concerning C and F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant Articles 314(1) and 311 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act (aggravating concurrent crimes within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments stipulated in the heavier crime of interference with business) among concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act is that the nature of the crime in light of the crime in this case is poor.

In addition, there are many criminal records that the defendant was punished as a fine for the crime of interference with business in 201, and was punished as a similar and similar crime.

However, the defendant is divided into crimes, and there was an agreement with the victim of interference with business.