A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On January 25, 2019, at around 22:10, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business for approximately 30 minutes by force by forcing the customers to leave the room, and allowing them to enter the room, by putting together the cafeteria’s face side, which is the customer, of the victim C, in a “D” restaurant in Songpa-gu Seoul, where the victim C, she works for the victim C, and neglecting the victim’s restaurant business for about 30 minutes by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement of E;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of CCTV Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: One to five years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [number of reasons for suspension of execution] interference with the affairs, [Type 1] interference with the affairs (special person] - The elements for mitigation: Reduction [including a serious effort to recover damage] [the scope of the recommended area and the recommended punishment] mitigation area, imprisonment with prison labor for one month to eight months [the general person] - The factors for mitigation: Voluntary reflectivity [the reasons for suspension of execution of sentence] - Major pride: The reason for suspension of execution of sentence - The reason for suspension of execution of sentence - General pride: Voluntary reflectivity;

3. Determination of sentence: Four months of imprisonment and one year of suspended sentence;