except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

At around 16:50 on December 11, 2019, the Defendant: (a) committed an assault, such as blocking the front of the said E in front of the Seo-gu, Seogu, Daegu; (b) having been urged to return home from the superintendent of the police station D District D District Station affiliated with the Daegu Seo-gu Police Station, which was dispatched to the site after receiving a report 112, to go home from the said E; and (c) acting as “Isle, frila, Isle, Isle, Isle, Isle, Isle, Isle, Isle, Isle.”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. In order to establish the legal order of the country of reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act and eradicate the light of public authority, it is necessary to strictly punish the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties.

However, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant is divided into a mistake, the fact that there is no record of punishment exceeding a fine, and the age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, means and result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.