A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

From August 7, 2016 to 17:20 on the same day, the Defendant, from around 16:30 on August 7, 2016 to around 17:20 on the same day, left the restaurant at “D” restaurant to customers entering the said restaurant, thereby obstructing the victim’s restaurant business by avoiding disturbance for about 30 minutes, such as paying time fees to other customers who were seated on the table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the criminal place

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 314 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending sentence] interference with the business of sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution refers to the following reasons: (a) the mitigation area (one month to eight months) [special mitigation] [decision of sentence] and the prohibition of punishment: (b) a person who is not subject to criminal punishment or prosecution several times due to violent acts, etc.; (c) the degree of interference with the business of this case seems to have violent inclinations, such as being subjected to punishment or prosecution several times due to violent acts, etc.; (d) the confession and reflects the crime of this case; (d) the defendant has committed the crime of this case under the influence of alcohol; (e) the victim has agreed with the victim; and (e) other facts that the victim does not want criminal punishment: the defendant's age, character, intelligence, intelligence and environment; (e) the motive, means and consequence of the crime;