beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On February 20, 2014, from around 23:00 to 23:15, the Defendant: (a) viewed that “A victim E, an employee of the former Young-gun, is able to be able to be able to refrain from funeral services in Korea; and (b) a customer, who sits on the next table, with the view that “I am blingly changed,” he would interfere with the restaurant business of the female for about 15 minutes; (c) the police officer called “I ambling, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am to be able to interfere with the funeral business of the female; (d) on February 21, 2014, the Defendant called “I am to the police, I am to be able to report what I am to the police, and I am to be unable to interfere with the victim’s business by force.”
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Statement of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused;
1. Statement of the police statement regarding E;
1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;
1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts are limited to four times for the latest five years. In particular, the defendant is inevitable to punish him/her in light of the fact that he/she committed a crime of interference with the instant business even though he/she was sentenced to six months of imprisonment or two years of suspended execution due to an injury, etc. at the Gwangju District Court on September 26, 2013, which became final and conclusive on October 5 of the same year, and was in office for the suspended execution period, and he/she again committed a crime of interference with the instant business without being aware of the fact that he/she committed a crime of interference with the first business.
However, on June 12, 2014, after the closing of the argument in this case, the defendant expressed that the victim is not subject to punishment by mutual consent with the victim on June 12, 2014, and the defendant reflects his depth and repents.