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

1. On May 8, 2020, at the front of the C District of the Chuncheon Police Station, the Defendant: (a) reported 112 on May 8, 2020, in front of the C District of the Chuncheon Police Station, which was located in B, Chuncheon, that the passengers aboard the taxi were able to pay the taxi fee and invite them to return to the taxi from the slope D belonging to the said District, who was called up, and (b) expressed that the Defendant “this spaws, spaws, and spaws” was tightly sealed twice on the chest hand and head.

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

2. On May 8, 2020, the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender committing a crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties on the grounds of paragraph (1) and was under investigation on the part of the Defendant at around 22:43 on May 8, 2020.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on closure photographs;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act in the suspended sentence is that the defendant is under the influence of alcohol, is not paying a taxi fee, and the defendant is not paying a disturbance, and the police officer is able to take a bath without complying with the police officer's recommendation for returning home after receiving 112 a report, and commits each of the crimes of this case where the police officer assaultss the police officer within the police station district after arresting the offender in the act of committing an act of violence, and the nature of the crime is not good, and the defendant is not subject to a letter from the victimized police officer, and the defendant was not subject to a letter from the injured police officer, and the defendant was also subject to a prior offense of violence, a single insult and a criminal offense of interference with business.

However, the defendant.