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

On October 16, 2018, at the front of the C convenience store located in Nam-gu, Busan, the Defendant 112 reported that “the owner interferes with his business by taking advantage of the convenience store.” On the front of the C convenience store located in the Nam-gu, Busan, Busan, the Police Station D District D District of the Busan, which received a notice of penalty payment due to an act of disturbing E from the circumstances belonging to the D District of the Busan, the Defendant spits the nature of the drinking water on the drinking water that he was in front of the convenience store, and the Defendant spits the drinking water on the drinking water that he was in front of the convenience store.” The Defendant spits the horses from the above E to the effect that “the act of spiting the drinking water by taking advantage of it is also controlled as a light crime.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the 112 reported case by police officers and the crackdown on criminal offenders in violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (investigation into the current state, etc. at the time of dispatch of the site), photographs, etc. taken up against the victim, logs, 112 reported materials, investigation reports (a CCTV image and photographic image recorded on the face of a suspect A).

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following conditions shall be considered in light of the favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is an unfavorable circumstance, such as the following: (a) the crime of this case is committed by a police officer who was sent at a convenience store to receive a penalty payment notice by an act of disturbance of drinking alcohol from a police officer who was dispatched after receiving a 112 report; (b) the nature of the crime is not good; and (c) the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime in the Suwon District Court's Sungnam branch on July 7, 2017.

However, the fact that the defendant recognizes the facts charged is seriously against the defendant, and the type of the defendant exercised is very serious.