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

On March 29, 2014, at around 23:00, the Defendant sent a phone to the 112 reporting center using his mobile phone in the state of being drunk in front of 49-ro 49, Ansan-si, Ansan-si, the Defendant: (a) reported the Defendant’s report to the 112 reporting center; and (b) instructed the victim, who was sent to the site after receiving the Defendant’s report, to arrest the victim, who was asked about the details of the report from the slope D affiliated with the Ansannsan Police Station C District, which was the victim of the Defendant’s arrival; and (c) assaulted the victim’s neck by drinking once.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression, and investigation of the victim's crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reasons for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] shall be considered in light of the following circumstances: (a) the basic area of obstruction of performance of official duties (6 to 1 year and 4 months) [no person who has been specially punished] (decision of sentence]; (b) the previous criminal records of the same kind; (c) the poor quality of the crime; (d) the defendant is against the defendant; and (e) the suffering from the depression, etc.; and (e) the sentence as ordered.