업무방해
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
(2) On May 23, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 00:40 on May 23, 2016, and around 00:0, the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City City Siro**L*LL*,”****** the high flagpole, the Defendant was involved in the victim’s restaurant business by avoiding disturbance for about 30 minutes by holding the victim, who is an employee of the above restaurant, with the appearance of the above customer, and having the above customer take a bath to the above restaurant; and (b) having the victim, who is an employee of the above restaurant, restrains the above restaurant business.
Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Application of the police statement protocol law to B
1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;
1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for observation of protection;
1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to five years; and
2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the types of decisions] that there is no interference (the area of recommendation and the scope of the recommended punishment] with the business of interfering with the business, and the basic area of the recommended punishment [the scope of the recommended punishment], six months to one year and six months.
3. There is no reason for the suspension of execution [main reasons for consideration] [No reason for general consideration] : There is no effort to recover damage, positive: Serious reflectness, or there is no criminal conviction or heavier for suspension of execution.
4. The defendant who has been sentenced to a fine on three occasions due to a crime of interference with business affairs, intimidation, insult, etc. in 2015, and has been sentenced to a fine on several occasions prior to such sentence, even if he/she had been sentenced to a fine;
In light of the repeated criminal acts of similar type, the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor at this time, reflects the mistake, and will not act in the future under the influence of alcohol.
Considering the fact that there is no previous criminal record or more than the suspension of execution, it is necessary to set the lower limit of the sentencing guidelines and suspend the execution of the sentence, and to observe the protection.