However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

피고인은 2016. 11. 7. 06:40 경 부산 동구 B에 있는 C 식당 앞 노상에서, 피고인이 식당에서 소란을 피운다는 위 식당 업주의 신고를 받고 출동한 부산 동부 경찰서 D 지구대 소속 경위 E으로부터 귀가를 권유 받고 귀가하던 중 갑자기 그곳에 주차되어 있던 순찰차의 운전석 문을 열고 손으로 운전대를 잡아 위 순찰차를 운행하지 못하도록 하고, 이를 말리는 위 E에게 “ 씨 발 놈 아, 못 간다, 개새끼야. ”라고 말하면서 손으로 E의 가슴을 밀치고 멱살을 잡아 흔들며 발로 E의 다리를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] No. 1 (Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties and Compelling of Duties) [Judgment of sentencing] is the basic area (from June to April 1] [Judgment of sentencing] [Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act] [Article 62(1) of the same Act, despite the past record of the crime, there is no past record of the crime in this case, and there is no record of the crime in this case, and the defendant has the attitude of recognizing and opposing the fact of the crime in this case. In addition, the sentence shall be determined as per the disposition by taking into account the motive and background of the crime in this case, the circumstances after the crime in this case, the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, etc., and