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 November 9, 2016, around 08:55, the Defendant interfered with the business operation of the victim C by force for about 20 minutes, such as the Plaintiff’s 08:55, in D marina operated by the victim C in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B1, in which the breath was accumulated in a drunk, and the Defendant’s expulsion interfered with the business operation of the victim by force for about 20 minutes.

2. The Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties at the time and place specified in paragraph 1, and was arrested by police officers F of the Seoul Southern Police Station E box, who was called out after receiving a report of the above C C 112, as a current offender suspected of interference with the duties, and committed assault, such as breath, F’s blaps, and booming several times.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning 112 report processing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports, tear tear photographs;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the choice of imprisonment for each 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 under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for one month to seven years;

2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines for one crime (Interference with the performance of official duties) and the scope of the final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple crimes (including serious efforts to recover damage) by the mitigation area (one month to eight months), the mitigation area of punishment (including the scope of the recommended punishment), the mitigation area of punishment (including the specially mitigated person), the mitigation area of punishment for multiple crimes (including serious efforts to recover damage): Six months to October 1: 6 months to October 1.

3. The fact that there is a number of records of punishment as a crime of final and conclusive punishment is disadvantageous.

On the other hand, the injured party by agreement with the victim interfering with business.