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

1. On April 30, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 05:30, at a “D” restaurant operated by the victim C in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City on April 30, 2016, the Defendant: (b) caused the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, to go home to the right part of E, and (c) continuously demanded the Defendant to go home to the Defendant, the Defendant, who is an employee of the guard company receiving the said E’s heading; (d) caused the Defendant to go home to go home; and (e) caused the Defendant to go home to go home to the other customers; and (e) caused the Defendant to go home to enter.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force between approximately 20 minutes.

2. On April 30, 2016, at around 06:05, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, at the front of the “D” restaurant located in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon. On April 30, 2016, the Defendant: (a) reported by the FF 112 that the Defendant spawns, as stated in the foregoing paragraph 1; (b) reported by the G District of the Incheon Yeonsu-gu, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, which was the circumstances leading up to the employees of the G District of the G District of the Yeonsu-gu, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, in turn, sent back the Defendant spawn at one time on the left side of the said H’s drinking, and sent the quality of the Defendant spawn at one time and several times in drinking.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Each police statement made to H and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (victim telephone conversations, call call of employees of security enterprises) and hearing of statements by a witness I telephone;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing duties) and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for community service and order to attend lectures.