However, from the day this judgment became final and conclusive, the Defendants are above one year each.

1. Defendant A around May 30, 2018, around 01:20, at the Incheon Seo-gu Police Station D police station located in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, and Defendant A’s “mari-gu brought a bank.”

“A police officer who received 112 reports to the effect that “A” arrived at a district guard and borrowed a portable phone from the police officer E, the police officer affiliated with the district guard, and was in time of a man-child appearance B, and was put on the floor of the E-owned mobile phone, and whether E “h was a portable phone”

“ ...... why why the high defect f.s. ‘????

A. C. C. C. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. and C. H. H. H. H. at a time by hand, the victim’s part of f.h.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the police officer's performance of duties on the 112 reported case.

2. Defendant B, at around 01:46 on May 30, 2018, at the place indicated in the foregoing paragraph (1) around 01:46, the Defendant was arrested as a current offender for the same reason as described in the foregoing paragraph (1) and was under guarded by Defendant B, “I are women who are still women.”

The Republic of Korea issued SP d.", and three police officers, such as Police Officers F, etc., belonging to the police unit of the Incheon Western Police Station D Police Station D police unit, caused A to capture A's locks, while being put up, the police officers, such as Police Officers F, etc., in order to capture A's locks, he/she pushed up the F's shoulder with visible, chemical, and double hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders and the use of gear by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each police statement protocol to E and F;

1. Defendants of the relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 136(1) and 136’s choice of imprisonment

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant A of the community service order: The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act 【The scope of recommended punishment】 The basic area [ June - one year and six months] is the general mitigated person: the person who has no criminal punishment record (Defendant A).