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

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On September 19, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for the crime of interference with business, etc. by the Incheon District Court on September 19, 2018, and completed the enforcement of the sentence on May 2, 2019.

【Criminal Facts】

At around 10:05 on July 9, 2019, the Defendant: “D” operated by the victim C in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Bupyeong-gu around July 9, 2019; and around July 9, 2018, the Defendant, under the influence of force, obstructed the victim’s legitimate restaurant business operation by force for about 30 minutes, such as threatening the victim to have been punished for interference with business by leaving the said establishment in the said establishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal history records, investigation reports ( Results of suspect's search), results of suspect search, results of suspect search (A), investigation reports (Attachment of judgment), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of Part VII of the judgment;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders;

1. Aggravation of the range of recommending punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of recommending punishment] interference with business affairs [the category 1] interference with business affairs (the scope of recommending punishment and recommending punishment]: In the area of aggravation of the same repeated crime [the scope of recommending punishment and recommending punishment], one to three years and six months of imprisonment;

2. On September 19, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to criminal punishment as to the crime of interference with business through several times, and in particular, on May 2, 2019, the Defendant again interfered with the instant business within two months from the date of discharge, even after the execution of the sentence was completed on May 2, 2019. Of the other party to the crime of interference with business, who was sentenced to the instant punishment for interference with business.