A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] On May 7, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for interference with business affairs at the Seoul Southern District Court, etc. on May 7, 2014, and was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor for interference with business affairs at the Seoul Southern District Court on October 28, 2015, and the said sentence became final and conclusive on March 31, 2016, and the execution of the said sentence was completed at the port prison on November 2, 2016.

[2] On July 1, 2018, at around 02:00, the Defendant received a demand from the injured party to calculate the remaining drinking value by ordering “D” amusement points operated by the victim C of the first floor underground located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, by placing an order for alcohol and alcohol, and paying 50,000 won, out of 1.110,000 won of the price, and thereby, the Defendant received a demand from the injured party to pay the remaining drinking value.

“The Doar’s hack” and “the hack hack of the Doar”, and the hack of the hack for about one hour, thereby obstructing the victim’s duty of entertainment drinking business by force, such as by avoiding disturbance for about two customers, making the hack of the hacks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. Receipts:

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries about criminal history and investigation reports (the same criminal record and confirmation of repeated crimes);

1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Circumstances favorable to the sentencing of Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes: The defendant agreed with the victim.

In light of the fact that the Defendant was punished by interference with the same kind of crime, and there was a record of crime committed again during the period of repeated crime with a fine of one million won and five million won or more due to interference with the business again during the period of repeated crime, the crime is very poor in view of the fact that the Defendant repeatedly committed the crime of interference with the business of this case without any reflection.