A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

1. On December 1, 2016, the Defendant interfered with the business of the Defendant: (a) under the influence of alcohol in the D cafeteria located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, the Defendant obstructed the Defendant’s operation of the cafeteria by force by allowing an unspecified number of customers, who had attempted to visit the said cafeteria, to refrain from entering the cafeteria by going through the cryp and going through the cryp to the cryp; and (b) by allowing an unspecified number of customers, who had attempted to visit the said cafeteria to enter the cafeteria.

2. When the Defendant received a request from the Victim F (F (44) who is an operator of the foregoing boomed rice boomed in a time, at the same time and place as Paragraph 1, the Defendant: (a) collected salt, which is a dangerous object in the above restaurant table; and (b) made the victim clicked with the “fluoring of snow,” with the victim as if he had the snow, and threatened the victim with the snow, thereby threateninging the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (to attachCCTV data);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Articles 284, 283(1) (special intimidation, choice of punishment by imprisonment) of the Criminal Act, and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (Interference with duties and choice of punishment by imprisonment);

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes is when and against the defendant committed the instant crime, and the fact that the defendant under the agreement with the victim of a special intimidation does not want to punish the defendant is favorable to the defendant, and the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of six months of imprisonment with prison labor on December 2, 2015 at the Daejeon District Court on December 10, 2015, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 10, 2015, and is still under the grace period. The defendant committed the instant crime, including the crime of interference with the same kind of crime, without being aware of it during the suspension period, in light of the content of the instant crime, the nature of such crime is not good, and the fact that the defendant was punished as a obstruction of business.