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

On November 26, 2016, at around 18:00, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force over about 40 minutes due to the following: (a) under the influence of alcohol in the “E” restaurant operated by the victim D(61) located in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the Defendant: (b) expressed the victim’s “Chewing knives”, and (c) expressed the victim’s “Chewing knives”, without any justifiable reason; and (d) holding the customer seated in another table, seated in a large voice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the receipt statute

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Legal penalty: Imprisonment with prison labor for one month and five years;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) Determination of types: Disturbance of business interference crime>

B. Special sentencing factors: [Mitigation elements] No penalty is imposed

(c) The sphere of recommendation and the scope of recommended sentences: Reduction field, imprisonment for not more than eight months;

3. Circumstances disadvantageous to the decision of sentence: The conditions favorable to the fact that there have been two times the records of punishment for the same kind of crime: confession, reflectivity, the fact that the victim has agreed smoothly with the victim, the fact that there is no record of punishment heavier than the suspension of execution, the defendant's age, sex, intelligence and environment, intelligence and family relationship, motive, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as the same as the order, comprehensively taking into account the records of the crime in this case and