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

Around 10:08 on February 3, 2019, the Defendant used “hulule” game using a card at C office located in the 10:08 level B, and used a 112 report to inform the Defendant of his personal information from E (the age of 47) who was sent to the site after receiving a report from 112, “hule cule cule cule cule cule cule cule cule cule cule cule cule.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the above E- 112 Reporting Cases, a police official.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs, such as water circulations, investigation reports (the confirmation of telephone conversations between the shootings and field map);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal 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. Scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines (decision of type) of the obstruction of performance of official duties: [Type 1]/ the coercion of official duties (special sponsor): Where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor (the scope of the recommended area and the recommended punishment), mitigation area of the sentence, and one month to eight months of the imprisonment.

3. Determination of sentence: Six months of imprisonment with prison labor and one year of suspended sentence (including a white and reflective fact, the degree of violence is insignificant, and an agreement with the victimized police officer, etc.);