Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

On November 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 22:30, at the package run by the Victim C (FF) in front of the Agricultural Cooperative of Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu Northern-gu, Inc. (FF) around 60 years of age, and (b) caused a dispute over drinking and drinking all the Defendant, and (c) attempted to fluencing the Defendant into a large number of customers who drink on their own while drinking alcohol and drinking alcohol on their own; and (d) attempted to flucing them into a fluor, and fluoring them into a fluor, and fluoring them into a fluor, and fluoring them into a fluor, and fluoring them into a fluor, thereby interfering with the Defendant’s business by having the victim fluoring the disease, which is a dangerous object on their customer’s face, and fluoring them on their left side for two weeks of treatment, thereby interfering with the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Some statements made against the defendant during the police interrogation protocol;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the victim's body photographs and field photographs, diagnosis reports on injuries, investigation reports (to hear the circumstances, etc. of the victim C) and investigation reports (to hear the circumstances, etc. of the relative case of the suspect);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Articles 258-2 (1), 257 (1) (a point of special injury) of the Criminal Act, and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of interference with business and choice of imprisonment with prison labor) concerning criminal facts;

1. As to the assertion of mental and physical weakness under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes, the defense counsel held that the defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness by drinking alcohol at the time of each of the crimes in this case. Thus, according to the evidence, the defendant's assertion that the defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness, even though he was aware of a little amount of drinking alcohol at the time of each of the crimes in this case, it does not seem that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above