A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

When the defendant voluntarily withdraws from alcohol, he/she had worked in the "C" office operated by the victim B with introduction of daily work days, he/she was able to take a bath or to avoid disturbance at any time.

1. On June 20, 2015, from around 06:10 to around 06:35 of the same day, the Defendant interfered with the business affairs of the victim’s human resources supply business office by force, by force, such as drinking, continuing the victim’s “Chewing gue” office located in the said “C” office located in the window of Changwon-si from around 25 minutes to around 06:35 of the same day.

2. Refusal to eviction;

A. On July 26, 2015, around 05:30 on July 26, 2015, the Defendant did not leave about 15 minutes until the police officer called out by the victim’s report at the victim’s “C” office, and received a demand from the victim for delivery of coffees on the floor under the influence of alcohol, and does not leave the victim’s place without justifiable grounds.

The Gu refused to comply with the Gu.

B. On July 30, 2015, the Defendant entered the above “C” office on July 30, 2015, and did not return to the office for about 15 minutes after receiving a request from the victim for delivery, and did not leave the office without justifiable reasons.

The Gu refused to comply with the Gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. B written statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (as to attachment of 112 Report List for Handling Cases);

1. Relevant provisions of Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (Interference with Business), Article 319(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (in response to withdrawal) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for each crime;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The fact that the probation and community service order continued to commit the instant crime without being aware of the fact that they had been in office for the period of suspension of the reasoning of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and there was a history of punishment several times due to similar crimes.