A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On May 9, 2017, the Defendant: “E operated by the Gu C and the second floor victim D” store in Ansan-si around 22:00, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s main business by force at the said establishment for about 30 minutes, such as: (a) he saw that he would drink the alcohol prior to making drinking and lost the card and handphone; (b) she returned to the establishment; (c) he gets back to the other customers; and (d) by sounding the “inviting the morale” to the other customers, and allowing them to go to the customers at the said establishment, thereby interfering with the victim’s main business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the observation of protection and observation [the scope of the sentencing guidelines] - The area of mitigation (one month to eight months) for each type of business (Interference with business) (one month) - The area of special mitigation: Non-won for punishment [decision of sentence] - Unfavorable circumstances: In addition to four times before and after the same kind of business is obstructed, the majority of violent criminal records even in addition to those before and after the same kind of business is committed. - In favorable circumstances: the defendant recognized the offense, and the victim did not want to be punished.