However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 2, 2019, at around 23:04, the Defendant observed that D police officers of the Gangseo Police Station D used a singing practice room as a customer in Gangdong-gu Seoul (Seoul) around 23:04, while using a singing practice room, they controlled the sales of alcoholic beverages of the said singing practice room, the Defendant sent the above E-mail from the above police officers by taking a bath to “I am feass,” and “I am fass,” even though the Defendant sent several warnings to the police officers, such as “I amfas, during the performance of public duties, I am the above E-mail in his hand, I am going to the above F, who tried to bear the above identification card, and assaulted the police officers, such as taking the hand of the said F F’s hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the regulation of public morals business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of F (including the part on the record of the E Statement);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (verification of motion pictures);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (Punishment prescribed for the crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties against E by police officers with heavier rank);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “contributable circumstances”) prevents the Defendant from performing his/her duties by assaulting the victimized police officers on duty, and the responsibility for such crime is not somewhat weak.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and is against the defendant, and that there was no record of criminal punishment due to the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. shall be considered as favorable to the defendant.

In addition, in comprehensive consideration of the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., various sentencing factors specified in the records and arguments in this case, the punishment as ordered shall be determined.