However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On June 13, 2018, at around 14:30 on June 13, 2018, the Defendant: (a) ordered food at a restaurant operated by the Victim C in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju; (b) the Defendant was not good to drink during eating; and (c) the Defendant got out of the restaurant by having his employee and the injured; and (d) the Defendant was able to keep the victim and his employee in desire, sound, and 55 minutes of noise before the restaurant.

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 C’s written laws and regulations

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The fact that the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the observation of protection and observation are repented in depth, that those who have agreed with the defendant do not want the punishment, that there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine, or that there is a favorable circumstance, or that there is a record of punishment several times due to the same crime since 2011, and that the risk of recidivism is high, the execution of imprisonment shall be suspended, but the order to observe the protection shall be added, and the punishment shall be determined as set forth