Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

【The Defendant, after remanding this Court on June 1, 2016, was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment by the appellate court due to interference with business affairs, etc., the Defendant completed the execution of the sentence at the Incheon detention center on October 4, 2015.

【Criminal facts】 On July 20, 2017, the Defendant was drunk at the D cafeteria operated by the Victim C (39 tax) in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon around 10:00, and was divingd on the above cafeteria’s floor under the influence of alcohol, and “Neine”

The term "at the time of their mind" means the voice of a large voice, such as "at the time of their mind," and satisfing the disturbance.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force for about one hour.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Previous convictions: Inquiry about criminal history, current status of personal confinement, text of judgment, and application of statutes;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine (the following favorable circumstances):

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The circumstances that are disadvantageous to the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order: The amount of disturbance that occurred during the period of repeated crime, cumulative favorable circumstances for the same and similar criminal records: the defendant, who was locked on the floor of the restaurant, filed a report to the police inevitably.

The victim has not been punished from the beginning.

In the course of committing the crime, the tangible power for the body or gyms has not been exercised.

On the other hand, in the beginning of the case, the severity of criticism is not much high in disregarding the warning of repeated crimes or in the realization of violent habits.

Considering these circumstances, even if the defendant is placed in short-term detention on the grounds of minor crime of repeated crime period, re-socialization or special preventive effect is unlikely to achieve certain results, and rather, the livelihood of the defendant's pitor or those dependent on him can be examined as much.

It is rather than detention that can be placed on short-term isolation.