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

At around 22:20 on January 13, 2020, the Defendant, at the main point of “C” located in Junggu Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, with the Defendant’s report that he was frighting, and the circumstances leading up to the D District Unit of the Seoul Central Police Station D District of Daegu-gu, which called “E” and called “E” on the ground that E requests the presentation of identification card, namely, “I will pay fright, why I will pay identification card, and will do so.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the protection of police officers' lives, bodies and property, prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement concerning E and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling Table;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

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. Determination of sentence: Determination of sentence shall be made in full view of the following circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and various conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments in this case:

D. Unfavorable circumstances: The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, by assaulting the police officer called out after receiving a report on the disturbance at the main point, and thus, the nature of the crime is poor in light of the contents of the crime.

In order to establish the law and order of the state and eradicate the light of the public authority, strict punishment on the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is needed.

The favorable circumstances are confession and reflective.

There is no criminal record exceeding the same kind of power or fine.