However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

On August 11, 2014, at KRW 00:42, the Defendant: (a) laid down B apartment B apartment 504 405, and was called up after having received the report of 112 of the Domestic Violence Case, and (b) Doc affiliated slope D of the original Police Station C District District of the original Police Station, which called “the police officer is superior to damage of things within the territory of the Republic of Korea,” and laid down odor at the bottom of the said site, and caused the Defendant to stop the Defendant, and (c) Docked off the Defendant, the Defendant Dockeded Doc with the slope, thereby threatening Doc police station.”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime. Article 136 (Selection of Imprisonment or Imprisonment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for not more than five years;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) Determination of types: Crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties, obstruction of performance of official duties, and Category I (Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties);

(b) Scope of recommendations: Basic area, six months to one year;

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months, suspension of execution for two years, and 24 hours in the lecture of violent therapy for twenty-four hours (fluorous circumstances) and reflect (fluorous circumstances) that the quality of the crime is not good for committing an offense of obstruction of performance of official duties;