Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 5, 2017, at around 21:00, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the victim’s business by force for about 30 minutes, including, but not limited to, making two customers in the said landings, the Defendant: (b) obstructed the victim’s business for about 30 minutes, on the ground that the victim was unable to sell alcohol to the Defendant; (c) made the Defendant under the influence of alcohol.

2. At around February 5, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around February 21:10, 201; (b) the victim F (42 years of age) (the police officer) called the Defendant, sent out after receiving the said D-112 report; and (c) the Defendant was found to have been appointed to the Defendant at the place where the said D- and name customers are located.

The victim publicly insultingd the victim by openly obsting a large voice of “The retirement pay shall be the date of the birth if the gushes, the gushes, and the date of the birth if the bshes wrong gushes,” such as the gushes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D or F;

1. Complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business, the selection of fines) concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 311 of the Criminal Act (the point of insult and the selection of fines);

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 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. There are records that the Defendant had been subject to criminal punishment several times for the same kind of crime, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, and did not reach agreement with the victim F.

A favorable reason is that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, that the defendant does not want the punishment of the victim D by mutual consent with the victim D, and that the defendant deposited KRW 30,000 to recover the damage of the victim F.