The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] On September 11, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor due to interference with business affairs at the Seoul Eastern District Court on September 19, 2015, and the sentence became final and conclusive on September 19, 2015, and the execution of the sentence was terminated at the said prison on May 28, 2016.

[Criminal facts]

1. On July 20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) purchased beer at “D convenience store” located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul from around 23:16 to 03:30 of the following day; (b) purchased beer; and (c) the Victim E, an employee of the Defendant, “I am dead and killed on the old day”;

The calculation of the fee was erroneous, “I would like to be bomb,” and it obstructed the victim’s convenience store management by force for about four hours, such as “I would like to do so, I would like to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see to see

2. On July 21, 2018, around 07:45, the Defendant damaged public documents, under the investigation of the charge of interference with the duties set forth in paragraph 1, 21-ro 21-gil, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Police Station F of the Seoul East-gu, Seoul, Police Station, issued a suspect examination protocol to inspect the documents, being sentenced to a large number of fines in the future, and would no longer be able to perform public work. In addition, the Defendant, on his/her hand, reduced the suspect examination protocol, which is a public document, thereby impairing its utility.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Each investigation report (damage to the protocol of suspect interrogation and refusal to affix seals, and party to field CCTVs);

1. 112 Reporting case handling table;

1. On-site photographs and CCTV images;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A) and Acts and subordinate statutes to report an investigation (reports made during the period of repeated offense);

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts (Interference with business).