A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than six 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

On August 13, 2019, at around 16:20, the Defendant: (a) ordered alcohol to the victim’s D restaurant operated by the victim C in Busan East-gu, Busan-gu; (b) was refused by the victim on the ground that the victim was drunk; (c) the victim was given a great voice to the victim; and (d) the Defendant was able to take a bath, such as “hing hinging, hing.h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h.s. h. h. h. h. h.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force between about 10 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement prepared in C;

1. Written complaint filed by C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on reporting internal accidents;

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

2. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than eight months (decision of a type): Interference with business [Class 1] interference with business [Special Convicts]: Reduction elements of punishment [the area of recommendation and the scope of recommendation]: Reduction range of punishment: Not more than eight months.

3. The Defendant, on the ground that the sentence was not added, interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by exercising power, such as throwing gas burners and salted fish, etc.

The degree of power exercised is not to be such that gaser and salted fish can be easily seen.

Even though the defendant has been sentenced to punishment for murder in 2011 and has been sentenced to punishment for injury in 2015, he again committed the same violent crime.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant seems to have led to confession and reflect on the crime of this case.

The defendant seems to have agreed with the victim.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship to the victim, motive, means and result of the crime, and crime.