A Imprisonment for one year, and each of the defendants B shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

Of the facts charged in this case, Defendant B.

[Defendant B] On March 22, 2017, he was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution due to a violation of road traffic law at the Suwon District Court’s Eunpyeong District Court’s House on March 2, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 30, 2017.

[Criminal Facts]

1. On November 1, 2016, Defendant A destroyed the following: (a) around 22:05, the victim E (the 55-year-old age-old) located in Busan B’s smoke system; (b) at the Fsing room operated by two entertainment receptioners; (c) the match was discarded; and (d) the line was cut off, and the line was cut off, and the line was cut off, and the market price of which is unknown.

2. At the time stated in paragraph 1, the Defendants: (a) expressed the victim’s desire for the same reasons as that of paragraph 1 at the singing room; and (b) caused the other customers to go out of the room by placing about about 10 to 20 minutes of the success, such as destroying the glass glass on the floor; and (c) let the other customers go out of the room.

The Defendants conspired to interfere with the singinging business of the victimized person by force.

3. The Defendants, who interfered with the performance of official duties, failed to perform their duties as described in paragraphs 1 and 2 at the time and place described in paragraph 1. The police officers H (the remaining, the age of 48), I (the age of 28), and I (the remaining, and the age of 28) belonging to the Busan G District Police Station G District Group in Busan, which was called upon upon 112, listen to the circumstances of the instant case against the above Fsing Library E. Defendant A while carrying out a bath theory, and Defendant A her blue with blue and threatening the said H’s breast part with a blue glass, blue and flue and threatening him with a shoulder glass, and Defendant B she was on his arms.

In collusion, the Defendants interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers H and I for criminal investigation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the witness H, I, E, J, and K (each legal statement of the above witness is not entirely inconsistent with each other, and the witness H, I, and E are written or partial memory different from the content of each police statement in this Court.