On January 9, 2017, the Defendant, within the ‘E’ restaurant operated by the victim D (hereinafter referred to as 51 years old), who had been in the C history of the Gu Office of the Government, around 15:00, the Defendant: (a) had a large sound called “Immp” while drinking an implied value; (b) had the State and the State in the place; and (c) had an implied tag, and had approximately 20 minutes of the disturbance; and (d) interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force, by avoiding the disturbance between approximately 20 minutes; and (e) having customers in the place left the said restaurant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. On December 21, 2016, the following facts are considered: (a) the relevant legal provisions regarding criminal facts; (b) Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the selection of a sentence; (c) the reason for sentencing of a sentence of imprisonment; (d) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for six months on the part of the official duty and for two years on the part of the suspension of execution; (c) the Defendant committed a crime during the suspension of execution; (d) the Defendant’s residence is inevitable for failing to perform his/her duty to observe the duty to observe the protection and observation; (e) the Defendant’s residence is not fixed; and (e) the Defendant’s depth reflects the Defendant’s wrong; (e) the victim does not want to be punished against the Defendant; and