A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, on February 5, 2018, 201:40 around 01:40 on February 5, 2018, 2018, the term “E” means “the victim is unable to enter the state of alcohol” and “the victim has taken the position to the effect that he/she was under the influence of alcohol.”

At this time, the match is far beyond the match.

Down 50 minutes, such as passing sound, was unable to cause disturbance.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's privacy or operation by force.

The Defendant of the 2018 Highest 2581, Sept. 12, 2018, at G convenience stores located in Daejeon Sung-gu F on September 23:10, 2018, for the victim H (26 years old) who is an employee of the above convenience store, without any particular reason, for drinking alcohol.

C. Around one-time period of time, the victim’s convenience store operation was obstructed by force by force, such as by putting the victim’s convenience store operation, by putting the victim’s voice, booming him/her abundance, and booming him/her abundance.”

Summary of Evidence

"2018 Highest 345"

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. D's self-written statements "2018 Highest 2581";

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A H statement;

1. Investigation report (No. 2 No. 5 of the evidence list);

1. Each related photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (to hear statements of victims);

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

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act: The defendant repeats a crime that interferes with another person's business under the influence of alcohol; in particular, in the case of the 2018 Godan 345 ruling, even before two months from the date of the crime, the defendant's attempt to find the same place of business and thereby interfere with the business in the same place of business; and the defendant already has the record of having been punished several times for crimes of the same kind of law.