A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Of the facts charged of this case, the prosecution against assault is dismissed.

Punishment of the crime

On June 25, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for interference with business in the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court on November 17, 2015, and completed the execution of the sentence in the astronomical Prison on November 17, 2015.

1. On April 18, 2016, the Defendant damaged the property by walking a toilet door amounting to KRW 400,000, the market price owned by the victim under the influence of alcohol, within KRW 301 operated by the victim D, the Defendant, at around 21:05, around 18, 201.

2. From 21:00 on the same day to 21:20 on the same day, the Defendant interfered with his duties: (a) and place at paragraph (1) and from 21:20 on the same day; and (b) whether the said victim D, who operates the Eel, does not interfere with his/her duties with his/her her ice.

“The part of the victim’s fingers, the victim’s fingers, and the part of the victim’s fingers, and the part of the guest room where other customers are accommodated, such as walking the door of the guest room, which other customers are lodging, interfere with the victim’s operation by force by avoiding disturbance, and allowing other customers who were lodging in the room to leave the room.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Written estimate;

1. Each photograph;

1. Previous records: References to inquiries, investigation reports (Attachment to the previous decisions and attached documents thereof), inquiry into inquiries, application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a certificate of confinement;

1. Article 314 (1) and Article 366 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime and Articles 314 (1) and 366 of the Criminal Act: Selection of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Part concerning dismissal of public prosecution under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, which increases concurrent crimes

1. On April 21, 2016, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant expressed that “the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol” from the injured party, “I would have to grow up to be able to grow up by tending to grow up, i.e., e., h., h., h.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s. 19:08 and 75s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.

2. The charged facts of this case are crimes falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, and prosecuted against the clearly expressed will of the victim.