A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Criminal facts

1. On February 18, 2017, the Defendant obstructed the Defendant’s operation of the restaurant by force for approximately 20 minutes, including, but not limited to, the following: (a) food on the table table is cut down, sound is cut down, sound is cut back, and trial expenses are paid to other customers in light of the victim C’s “E” restaurant at the time of light lighting around 19:17.

2. The Defendant, at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1, was in line with the victim’s left part elbows by gathering beer residues, which is a dangerous thing behind the victim for the foregoing reason.

In this respect, the defendant carried dangerous objects and assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as site and photographs of damage;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Articles 261 and 260(1) (the point of special violence) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;

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 defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code for the observation of protection and protection alleged that the defendant was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime in this case. Thus, according to the records, the defendant's drinking at the time of the crime in this case was acknowledged, but considering the circumstances such as the defendant's behavior before and after each crime in this case, it cannot be deemed that the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the above assertion cannot be accepted.

The reason for sentencing is the mitigated area of the first type of crime (crimes) (crimes (crimes) (crimes (Habitual, Cumulative, Special Assaults), the mitigated area (4 months to 1 February).