A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 17, 2017, from around 04:05 to around 04:30, the Defendant obstructed the Defendant’s business, without permission, shut down the iron of the corridor in front of the E main entrance door administered by the victim D in the Gyeonggi-si, and turn off the corridor over several occasions, walking the door door door door, without permission, set off the door door door, and take the door door door door door door door without permission, bringing the disturbance over about 30 minutes.

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

2. The Defendant: (a) committed an act of interference with the above business by the victim D at the main point above E around a day, such as paragraph (1), and (b) committed assault against the victim by breaking booming the victim’s breath, and by drinking booming the victim’s breath; and (c) committing assault against the victim.

3. On May 17, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 04:35, at the above E’s station, reported 112 due to the act of violence as referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) above; (b) and (c) on May 17, 2017, the Defendant was making it difficult for the Defendant to take part in the clothes of the police officer, on his own drinking, to ask questions about his personal information from the police officers G belonging to the Magi Police Station of the Gyeonggi-si Police Station.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by the police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the choice of imprisonment for each crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is the first crime (Interference with the performance of official duties) [the scope of recommending punishment], the basic area (from June to January to June) of the first type of crime (Interference with the performance of official duties) [the scope of recommended punishment] that there is no special sentencing person [the scope of recommending punishment] of the second type of crime (Interference with the performance of official duties] of the basic area (from June to January to June) (the person subject to special sentencing] of the first type of crime (Interference with the performance of official duties] of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act.