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

At around 02:50 on March 30, 2015, the Defendant used the Seongbuk-gu Seoul apartment guard room to call out the case from D’s situation where the Defendant was dispatched after receiving 112 report in relation to the fact of the occurrence of vision due to neighbors and noise, and used the victim’s sexual organ at one time, and used the victim’s sexual organ at one time by drinking, and used the victim’s sexual organ at the above D’s head back part, which was sent by the Defendant at the time.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of 112 reported duties and maintenance of order by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of E;

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

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] The sentence of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds that there is no basic area (6 to 1 year and 4 months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (6 to 1 year and 4 months) (the decision of sentence] of the basic area (6 to 6 months of the obstruction of performance of official duties] (the