The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

Punishment of the crime

On September 22, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with labor at the Busan District Court for the crime of interference with business, etc., and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 30, 201, and on September 28, 2016, the same court was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with labor for the crime of interference with business, and the said judgment became final and conclusive

The defendant stated in the bill of indictment on January 16, 2016 as " January 6, 2016" but it is obvious that it is a clerical error, so it is corrected as above.

At around 17:30, in the urban railroad C basin platform in Busan Metropolitan City, spits tobacco into the floor while drinking, spits down on the floor, and spit a disturbance, such as spits off and spiting down on the surface, which are the cause of the service, and spit off and taking a bath from the victim D, and interfere with the affairs of the subway service personnel by force of 30 minutes of household volume.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. A criminal investigation report (in relation to background of recognition and attachment of a list to handle 112 reported cases);

1. Criminal records: Criminal history records, inquiry reports (A), investigation reports (verification of judgments finalized after this case), and the application of a copy of judgment Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. The latter part of Article 39(1) of the Exempted Criminal Act (the instant final judgment and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are considered in relation to concurrent crimes. Considering the timing, method, content, etc. of the instant crime, if a judgment was rendered together with the final judgment, it would have not been deemed that a sentence higher than that set forth in the said final judgment was not rendered. Accordingly, it would be reasonable to exempt the instant case from punishment).