A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 19:25 on May 31, 2016, the Defendant: (a) placed the victim C’s main points in the “D’s operation,” which was under the influence of alcohol, and ordered the said victim to drink; (b) stated that the victim would threaten the victim who did not sell alcohol to her hand, and that the victim would be her hand, and that the victim would be her hand, and that the victim would be her hand, and that the victim would be her hand, and that the victim would be her hand, who was at the main points, could no longer use the main points by avoiding a disturbance of about 20 minutes for customers who were at the main points.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's bar business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written statements of victims C;

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

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [the scope of sentencing guidelines] - Class 1 (Interference with Business) reduction area (including efforts to recover damage) - Special mitigation person: The defendant's decision of sentencing] - favorable circumstances: The defendant's decision of sentencing is recognized, the victim does not want to punish himself/herself; the victim does not want to punish - Unfavorable circumstances: The defendant has experience of being punished as a same crime, such as punishment for interference with business in 2013 and punishment for a fine for interference with business in 2015 and 2016.