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

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

Punishment of the crime

On September 7, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment due to assault, etc. at the Busan District Court, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on September 8, 2017, and completed the execution of the sentence on the same day.

On November 7, 2017, at around 00:10, the Defendant: (a) requested a victim to drink 2 cans purchased within the E-point working at the convenience store located in Busan, Seo-gu, Busan, to stop outside the above convenience store; (b) the Defendant left the Defendant with a large sound, “Isker inside the opening house, she must cut at the time,” and the victim interfered with the victim’s convenience store operation by obstructing the victim’s entry by placing the Defendant out of the above convenience store by 30 minutes, and by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A detailed statement of the processing of reported cases;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (report on confirmation of criminal suspect convicts), application of Acts and subordinate statutes on personal confinement;

1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. Type 1 (Obstruction of Duties) for mitigation area (one to eight months), for mitigation area (special mitigation (special mitigation)), non-members of punishment (including serious efforts to recover damage), for the same type of repeated crime, within the scope of duties according to the sentencing criteria;

2. The crime of this case in which the sentence of sentence was rendered is deemed to have been committed by leaving the victim’s convenience store to a large sound, and obstructing the business at the entrance, and the case is not less severe. In particular, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of assault and obstruction of business before, and released on September 8, 2017, and thus, there is considerable possibility of criticism, such as committing again committing the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime for which the punishment was not much excessive, and the Defendant has several records of criminal punishment by exercising violence, and among them, there are many impacts of serving a prison sentence.