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 01:40 on August 8, 2019, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol in the Daegu Suwon-gu B, C 14, and was asked by E in the circumstances where the Suwon Police Station D District Unit was dispatched to the site after receiving a report of 112, the Defendant expressed his/her desire to ask questions about the circumstances of the instant case from E during the course of the incident, “I am off his/her head, I am off his/her head, I am off his/her head, I am off his/her head, I am off his/her he/she, and am off his/her cell phone at one time.”

Accordingly, the defendant's 112 police officer's 112 report handling duties interfered with legitimate execution of duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. 112 Reporting sheet, work log;

1. A report on investigation (the sequence 10 in list of evidence);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to on-site photographs and fuse photographs;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: One to five years of imprisonment;

2. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of types] of the obstruction of performance of official duties: [Type 1] No person shall be subject to the obstruction of performance of official duties or coercion of official duties [the scope of recommended areas and recommendations] (the scope of recommended areas and recommendations] basic area, six months to one year and six months.

3. Determination of sentence: Determination of sentence shall be made in full view of the following circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and various conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments in this case:

The crime of this case was committed against a police officer who was under the influence of alcohol in a singing practice room and received a report of 112, thereby obstructing the legitimate execution of his duties by exercising violence, and the nature of the crime is very poor in light of the substance of the crime.

The degree of violence committed by the defendant against the police officer is not easy, and the obstruction of the performance of official duties is committed in order to establish the law and order of the state and eradicate the light of public authority.