A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 8, 2016, from around 17:30 to 19:30, the Defendant interfered with the business of the victim C’s operation in Ansan-si B, Ansan-si, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant operation by force by putting the portable butane gas from the bottom of the floor without any reason under the influence of alcohol on the part of the victim’s restaurant operation.

2. On September 8, 2016, around 19:00, the Defendant suffered an injury from the victim E (the age of 63) who was known to the general public to drink alcohol together, and the Defendant was refused to offer a proposal to the victim E (the age of 63) who was aware of it, and the Defendant was able to get off the part of the number of treatment days because the victim’s right arms was cut off by hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each written statement E and C;

1. Application of related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes;

1. Standard for Sentencing - In the event that the mitigation area (two to one year), the mitigation area (including serious efforts to recover from damage), the mitigation area (two months to one year), the exemption area (including serious efforts to recover from damage), or considerable damage is recovered from the mitigation area (the scope of recommendation), the final sentencing scope according to the mitigation area (one month to eight months), the mitigation area (one month to eight months), the mitigation area (including a special mitigation), the mitigation area (including a serious effort to recover from damage), the mitigation area (one month to eight months) of punishment (including a serious effort to recover from damage): February to April 1:

2. It is recognized that the Defendant, who was sentenced to the sentence, led to the confession of the instant crime, and the victims expressed their intent not to have the Defendant punished before the instant indictment. Meanwhile, the Defendant is still under the suspension of execution for the same kind of crime, and the Defendant repeated the instant crime without being able to do so even though he was sentenced to a fine due to the same kind of crime, and there are many criminal records identical to the Defendant.