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

At around 14:50 on November 28, 2020, the Defendant avoided disturbance for about 10 minutes for the following reasons: (a) around 14:50, the Defendant: (b) had one customer in the store in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; (c) had been under the influence of alcohol, and (d) had 1 customer in the store; (d) had a large amount of interest without any justifiable reason; (e) had the victim talked with the victim’s voice “Sae and Sokbkb”; and (e) had the victim’s mobile phone operation duties by force, without complying with the victim’s demand; and (e) had interfered with the victim’s mobile phone operation duties by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement prepared B;

1. 112 Reporting case handling table;

1. Attachment: Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing video data backups;

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

2. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution.

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five years;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six months but not more than one year and six months (the type of decision) for a crime interfering with the business (the area of recommendation and the scope of the recommended punishment). The basic area of the recommendation and the scope of the recommended punishment: Six months to one year and six months.

3. The Defendant, without any particular reason, obstructed his business, such as avoiding disturbance in a mobile phone store of another person.

They did not receive a letter from the injured party.

These circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided the wrong facts.

The degree of tangible power exercised by the defendant is not so severe.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the defendant's age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., all the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments in this case shall be determined as ordered.