A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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.

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 16, 2016, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the victim’s main shop business by force for about two hours, such as making a fluencing the victim’s horse in the D packing horse run by the victim C in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu; (b) obstructed the victim’s main shop business by force for about two hours, such as making a flusium to other customers who refrain from drinking, while drinking alcohol on the D packing horse operated by the victim C.

2. Around May 16, 2016, the Defendant assaulted the victim E (42 years of age) who prevents the Defendant from breaking his/her pedal at the above location at one time, and assaulted him/her at four strokes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of C and E;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business, the choice of imprisonment), and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence and the choice of punishment by imprisonment) concerning the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. As a result of the observation of protection and community service order, Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of Social Service Order, the basic crime for sentencing [the scope of business interference] / [the scope of the area of recommendation] basic field, concurrent crimes between June and January 1, and June / [the scope of the area of recommendation] basic field, the result of the aggravation of multiple offenses between February and October 10: The defendant who was sentenced in June and January 11, committed each of the crimes of this case during the suspension period of execution due to interference with his/her duties, interference with his/her duties, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, all of the defendants recognize the crime, and the degree of damage suffered by the victim due to the obstruction of the defendant's business is considered not to be much severe, and the victim expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the defendant, and the age, occupation and occupation of the defendant.