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

A. On October 1, 2019, the Defendant interfered with business: (a) around 21:30 on October 1, 2019, the Defendant called the victim C’s head of the “D” house operated by the victim C, and called the victim, she was frighted with the victim, she was frighted with the victim, she was frighted with the victim, she was frighted with the victim, she was frighted with the victim, she was frighted with the victim, and she was frighted with the victim, she was frighted with the victim, and she was frightd with the victim, she was frightd with the victim’s head of the 30 minutes fright.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's business by force.

B. The Defendant’s obstruction of performance of official duties is above.

As described in the claim, the police officer F of the Seoul Northern Police Station E District Police Station, the police officer G sent out after receiving 112 a report, and the police officer in charge of the accident, committed assault, such as hearing the report against the above C, leaving the Defendant on the front floor of the said head office, and taking a bath to the defective police officer in order to verify his personal information.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases and the investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning C and F;

1. Reports on internal investigation (in cases of field situations, etc., related to the behavior and face of the person suspected of being involved), and picture of the scene;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (to hear victim C's telephone statements - interfering with business);

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for the crime

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to concurrent crimes;

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

1. The defendant with the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order shall interfere with the main duties and report.