A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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

1. At around 09:20 on May 3, 2019, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s business operation by force for about 30 minutes, such as: (a) at the Ototoba business store operated by the victim C in Busan-gun B; (b) under the influence of around 30 minutes, the Defendant: (c) expressed the victim’s desire to “Chewing” to the victim; and (d) was unable to enter the customer by leaving his/her house.

2. From March 2019 to April 2019, the Defendant expressed the victim E’s convenience store operated by the victim E in Busan-gun, Busan-gun, for the reason that the victim under the influence of alcohol did not sell alcoholic beverages to himself/herself, and obstructed the victim’s business by force for about 30 minutes by avoiding disturbance.

3. At around 19:00 on July 15, 2019, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s business by force for a period of about one hour, such as: (a) the Defendant, at the place above the foregoing paragraph (2); (b) was unable to enter the victim’s business by getting off his/her crypt, she is off his/her crypt, and her crypt, she she s

4. On June 9, 2019, at around 14:00, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s business operation by force for approximately 30 minutes by avoiding disturbance, including but not limited to, the Defendant, at the office operated by the victim G in the Busan FF, G, the captain of the city in Busan.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the 112 Report Handling Table to C, E, and G respectively;

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

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act repeatedly interfere with the duties of victims, and the fact that the defendant has a record of criminal punishment several times due to the crime of interference with business, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant reflects his fault and is still in excess of the fine.