However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. On December 6, 2016, the Defendant interfered with the business, on the ground that the Defendant claimed a large amount of the Defendant’s money for the use of singing from the “D’s operation of the Victim C located in Seocheon-si, 10:00 on the part of December 6, 2016,” and that the Defendant offered money to the Defendant’s neighbors.

In concluding that “the victim would be at the time of being injured,” it was difficult to avoid disturbance for about 30 minutes due to the threat of the victim, and the unloading of a calculating unit while referring to “Chewing”.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the singing operation of the victimized person by force.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the same place as indicated in paragraph 1 at around 10:30 on the same day as indicated in paragraph 1, and at the same place, at around 112 reported on the crime described in paragraph 1, the police officer of the Seocheon-gu Police Station E District police station, Seocheon-gu, Seoul who called the scene, attempted the Defendant to go to the above C, and told the said police officer to “picked him and pushed him,” and pushed him over three times the chest part of the above police officer.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with police officers' performance of official duties concerning the prevention, suppression, and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against F (List 5);

1. C’s statement (List 3);

1. Recording records (list 11);

1. Application of photograph (List 7) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, and imprisonment with prison labor for each offence;

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 Suspension of Execution (a confession, reflectment, absence of any criminal record heavier than a suspended sentence, and the victim is not subject to punishment or dies by several times and the police officer mentioned above is subject to a voluntary consent);