A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 19, 2018, the Defendant assaulted the victim in a way that the victim J (n, bn, 20 years of age) was flicked on September 22, 2018, on the ground that the above victim was flicked while calculating the blick value, and that the above victim was flicked during the calculation of the blick value, and was flicked by the method that the above victim was flicking the blick.

2. On April 3, 2019, around 21:58, the Defendant: (a) at the “N” convenience store operated by the victim M&(44 years of age) of Sejong L on April 3, 2019; (b) at the “N” convenience store operated by the victim M&L (44 years of age); (c) at the time of tobacco payment, the victim’s victim’s O (e.g., employee O) was pushed down several times by breabing the breath of the victim’s pib; (d) assaulting the victim’s mar; and (e) the victim’s breath of the breath, which is the victim’s M&, the victim’s M& who owns the bat on the calculation unit, and the display site containing food, such as the batp terminal, the Defendant 7,750,000 won, including the cost of replacing the bat terminal; and (e) obstructed the victim’s convenience store or interfere with the customer’s convenience.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victims, damaged the victim M's property, and interfered with the work of the victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to J, M andO;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the departments related to the occurrence report, notification of the 112 reported case, notification of the department related to the 112 reported case, processing table of the 112 reported case, photographic images, field photographs, damaged photographs, damage specifications, estimates, and photographs (CCTV caps);

1. Relevant Articles 260(1), 366, and 314(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of imprisonment with prison labor

1. Of concurrent crimes, the fact that the defendant's mistake in sentencing is recognized and reflected in Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes. However, the degree of damage in this case is small.