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

On December 06:52, 2019, the Defendant reported 112 to the effect that “the taxi is not a taxi passenger, but is not a taxi passenger,” and used the aforementioned D, i.e., the Daejeon Pungsung Police Station C District, the Daejeon Pream Station, which called “the taxi driver is not a taxi driver,” and the Defendant was urged to return home, by paying the taxi fee from D, “the taxi driver is not a taxi driver,” and the head is faced with D’s face, and the chest was 3-4, 3-4, 3-4, 2-3, 2-3, 2, 2, and 4-5, 4-5, the chest and the shoulder part of the said E’s face.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. A written statement;

1. 112 Application of the 112 Reporting List, photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is deemed to be less complicated in light of the background of the crime and the form of the act, etc., and thus, the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's mistake, and the fact that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime in this case, shall be taken into account, and other factors favorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, character, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, as well as the range of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee.