The Defendant, at around 20:40 on February 18, 2016, had a dispute over F and alcohol on the second floor of the “E” restaurant operated by the Victim D (son, 60 years of age) located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, 2016, the Defendant is not able to avoid the disturbance, such as shouldering the f and drinking of the f and drinking, and passing sound.

“The victim’s restaurant business was obstructed by force for about 10 minutes, including that other customers, who were in the air conditioning room, but were in the 1st floor of the city, throwed away from the floor of the air conditioning room on the 1st floor of the city, throwing away from the air conditioning room on the string of the city, leaving the 10th floor of the air conditioning room.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement of D and G;

1. On-site dispatch reports;

1. Investigation report (Attachment to the same kind of power) and text of judgment (Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014 High Court Order 986);

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing business and the choice of imprisonment) of the relevant law and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment] and the basic area [the scope of the recommended punishment] from June to June of one year and six months; and

2. Circumstances unfavorable to the decision of sentence: The Defendant committed the instant crime of interference with the instant business without being aware of the fact that he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months on June 10, 2014 by obstructing the performance of official duties and was under the suspended sentence of two years.

It is highly likely that the defendant interferes with the cafeteria business of the victim by avoiding disturbance, such as shouldering the main illness, and the method of committing the crime is not good.

There are considerable damages to the above victims due to the crime of this case.

The defendant has been punished several times for violent crimes.

The defendant's mistake is recognized as favorable circumstances.

The above circumstances, the background leading up to the Defendant to commit the instant crime, circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, the records of the Defendant’s past punishment, and others.