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

On January 23, 2019, at around 01:35, the Defendant: (a) received a 112 report that a drinking price had occurred; and (b) received a request from the police officer slope E, the police officer belonging to the Dong-gu Police Station D District, who was called to the site, for calculating several times, and returning home; (c) was sprinked, and was sprinked by a slope E, who was sprinking the shape of the border F; and (d) was sprinked.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties related to 112 reporting processing affairs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. Each statement of G and H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (Attachment to field CCTV images);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime (the point of each crime above);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to five years;

2. Scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of type] of the obstruction of performance of official duties or coercion of duties (special sponsers): In cases where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is insignificant (the scope of the recommended area and the recommended sentence] mitigation area, and one month to eight months of imprisonment.

3. Determination of sentence: (a) together with the Defendant’s speech and behavior and the degree of violence at the time of the instant crime; (b) the police officers did not suffer serious injury due to the instant crime; (c) the Defendant did not have the same criminal record; and (d) the Defendant did not have the same criminal record; and (c) the Defendant determined the sentence as ordered and the execution of the sentence is suspended, by comprehensively taking account of all sentencing conditions as indicated in the arguments, including the Defendant’s age, character