The punishment of the accused shall be determined by four months of imprisonment.

Punishment of the crime

On September 10, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspension of execution for four months as a result of interference with business at the Gwangju District Court, and was sentenced to a suspension of execution for four months at the Gwangju District Court on August 14, 2014, and the said sentence became final and conclusive on February 5, 2015, and completed the said suspension of execution on June 9, 2015.

On October 30, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 22:10, 2016, at the “D” restaurant operated by the victim C (n, 33 years of age) located in Gwangju Mine-gu; (b) the Defendant was unable to avoid disturbance for about 15 minutes, such as having flicken the flat of customers, and flick off the flat of the flat.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol against C and E;

1. Data on investigation reports (the confirmation of CCTV at the scene of damage and attachment of screen pictures) and photographs attached thereto;

1. Data of photographs;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and an investigation report (verification of repeated crimes) statute;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Scope of the recommended punishment for the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment] that interferes with the affairs of the Commission [the determination of the recommended punishment area] that reduces the scope of the mitigated punishment (the scope of the recommended punishment for the same kind of repeated crime that is not punishable] not more

2. Determination of sentence: The sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, background of the crime and circumstances after the crime, as described below six months of imprisonment.

The favorable circumstances: The injured party wanted to have the front wife of the defendant by the smooth agreement with the victim.

The crime has been led to confession, and the mistake has been divided.

The alcohol addiction center has expressed its intention not to repeat the crime, such as receiving education and counseling.

The term "unfavorable circumstances": The punishment shall be imposed by interference with each duty in the judgment, etc.