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

On May 10, 2020, the Defendant, at around 21:40 on May 10, 202, at “C main point” located in the Ulsan-gu B5, Ulsan-gu, the Defendant: (a) took a hand-time action that the police officer, who belongs to the Ulsan-gu Police Station D commander of the Police Station, sent out after receiving a report of 112 that the customer does not have the drinking value; (b) took a hand-time to check the personal information of the Defendant; (c) took a hand-time action that the police officer, who is a police officer belonging to the same department, took a hand-time to check the Defendant’s personal information; and (d) took a hand-time and pushed the Defendant’s son’s son, who was a police officer belonging to

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning 112 reporting handling duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Application of the respective Acts and subordinate statutes of E and F;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection and order to attend lectures;

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with labor for one month to five years;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the types of decisions] interference with the performance of official duties on the grounds that a crime interfering with the performance of official duties is [the Class 1] interference with the performance of official duties or coercion [the special sentencing factors] mitigation factors: Where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor [the territory of recommendation and the scope of the recommended punishment] mitigation area, one month to eight months of imprisonment;

3. The sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the fact that the defendant who was sentenced to the punishment in this case led to the confession of the crime in this case and the mistake is divided, and other various sentencing factors such as the age, environment, record of the crime, motive and consequence of the crime, the means and consequence of the crime in this case, etc.