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

On June 11, 2019, at around 20:35, the Defendant: (a) stated that the police officers D (Nam, 33 years old) belonging to the Ulsan Central Police Station C District called Ulsan Central Police Station C District called the Defendant, who was called up after receiving a report that the Defendant 112 had the Defendant her desire to do so in front of Seodaemun-gu, and was called up on three occasions to take her hand in order to care of the Defendant; and (b) stated that the Defendant her knee part of the said police officer was knee and kneed on two occasions.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on crime prevention and criminal investigation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of the body of the victim abused;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 60 (3) of the Juvenile Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: One to five years of imprisonment;

2. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of types] of the obstruction of performance of official duties: [Type 1] No person shall be subject to the obstruction of performance of official duties or coercion of official duties [the scope of recommended areas and recommendations] (the scope of recommended areas and recommendations] basic area, six months to one year and six months.

3. In order to establish a state order of sentencing and eradicate the light view of public authority, it is necessary to strictly punish the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties. The defendant's crime of obstruction of official duties in this case is not less than that of the crime, the defendant confessions and repents the crime in this case, there is no criminal penalty record against the defendant exceeding the fine, and other circumstances recorded in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered within the scope of recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines.