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

At around 13:35 on April 12, 2015, the Defendant: (a) 2015, the victim D (year 34) operated in Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, thereby obstructing the operation of the set-up operation by the victim by force on the ground that the victim D did not find out the safety of the loss of the Defendant; (b) expressed the victim D and F (year 61) a large amount of the victim D’s “nick, Chewing, and e-mail” to the victim D and f (year 61) who was an employee; and (c) set up a telephone device installed at that place and set up the key on the floor, thereby obstructing the victim’s operation of the set-up operation by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the third protocol of trial;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of D;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 314 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. As to the defense counsel's assertion under Article 62 (1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, the defense counsel asserts that the act of the defendant is dismissed as it did not take responsibility for making soup as to the loss of the defendant's security, and that the act of the defendant is a legitimate act.

In order to be called a legitimate act that does not go against the social norms, it shall be determined with a rational and rational judgment as to whether the motive or purpose of the act is justifiable, the means or method of the act, the reasonableness of the protected legal interest and the benefit of infringement law, the balance between the protected legal interest and the benefit of infringement law, urgency, and other means or methods are complementary. According to the evidence of this case, the defendant's act cannot be seen as a justifiable act that does not violate the social norms, and thus, the defense counsel

The criminal records related to the reason violence in sentencing have reached several times, and the fact that the defendant does not reflect is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, motive and method of the crime, and after the crime is committed.