A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 22, 2017, the Defendant: (a) reported the Defendant to the police at the time on April 22, 2017, from the “D main point operated by the Victim C (A, F, 37 years of age) (A, B)” to the police at the time of inn city B; (b) the Defendant was fluencing that the Defendant reported the Defendant to the police at the time.

(h) The Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine, and the Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's main business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the police statement protocol law to C

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection and attendance order;

1. The scope of punishment by sentence: Imprisonment for one month to five years;

2. The scope of the sentence recommended on the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended sentence] the scope of business interference [the scope of the recommended sentence], the area of mitigation (one month to eight months) [the person subject to special mitigation] the area of mitigation (including the person subject to serious efforts to recover damage).

3. The sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the fact that the defendant who has been sentenced several times of punishment for the same kind of crime, in particular, has the record of being sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same crime in 2014, the motive of committing the crime is bad, the defendant reflects the crime, and the fact that he has agreed with the victim, etc.

Rejection of Public Prosecution

1. On April 23, 2017, the summary of this part of the facts charged was arrested as a current criminal on the ground that the Defendant interfered with the main business of the “D” operated by the victim C (the age of 37) by force on April 23, 2017, and was transferred to the Snju Police Station Hongmun District, and was released, the Defendant again found the Defendant as the “D’s store,” and then found the Defendant as the “D’s store.”

I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am I am.