A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 March 1, 2016, from around 10:00 to around 12:00 of the same day, the Defendant: (a) fluencing the victim E’s “F restaurant”; (b) under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant fluencing customers of Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (c) fluencing them with “nick,” etc.; (d) fluencing the horses; (e) fluencing them; and (e) flucing them with a view to viewing customers; and (e) flucing them on the table and flucing them into the floor.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

2. At around 12:00 on March 1, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, and at around 20 minutes from the security guards assigned to the G police box to the victim who was called out after having reported about 112 that the Defendant drinked to drink, the Defendant was sprinked with the victim’s flap with a sprink. However, the Defendant sprinked the victim’s flap with the victim’s hand while taking a bath that “a flap. f. f. f. f. f.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of public order of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of statutes on police statements made to I and H

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Articles 314(1) (Interference with Business), 136(1) (Interference with Execution of Official Duties) and 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment, and imprisonment with prison labor;

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. The defense counsel asserts that “the reduction of punishment is sought as a result of a crime committed under the mental and physical weakness due to the main crime” under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act (negative). Thus, the defendant appears to have been in the state of being taken at the time of committing the crime. However, there was an obstacle to the ability to change things or make decisions.

Since it cannot be determined, we cannot accept the above assertion.

Sentencing 1-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-2-6-2-8-8-7-2-8-8-7-2-8-2-8-8-7-2-8-2-8-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-4-2-4