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

The defendant is a person in a de facto marital relationship with the victim B.

From around 20:00 on May 20, 2020 to 20:20 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) the Defendant saw the victim as “D” restaurant operated by the victim in Kimhae-si, that it did not demand money from the victim; (b) thereby, the Defendant saw the victim as follows: “I will not perform funeral services by opening the money up to one million won; (c) string off the money by drinking; (d) string a stop by drinking; and (e) string the floor; and (e) string the floor by cutting the water into the floor; and (e) cutting the hing of the hing part of the hing part to the floor; and (e) cutting the hing part of the hing part to the floor, the Defendant prevented the victim from operating the restaurant any longer on that day.

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 photographs and the Acts and subordinate statutes reporting internal investigation to B;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of the main sentence of Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act or above;

(Suspension of Execution in consideration of the relationship between the defendant and the victim, the agreement between the victim and the first offender, etc.)