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

The Defendant: (a) on December 10, 2017, at the “Cju shop” parking lot located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul; (b) reported on December 112, 2017, to the effect that “dacting is doubtful;” and (c) on the ground that the circumstances leading up to the police box belonging to the Seoul Gangnam Police Station Down-gu, Seoul, which called to the site and the police officer demanded the Defendant to take a alcohol test on the Defendant’s friendship, and that the police officer demanded the Defendant to take a alcohol test.

The expression “,” etc. was expressed, the body of E that restrains it, the chest body of E that restrains it, was pushed down several times by hand, and the police uniform was shakened for about 30 minutes.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the dispatch and investigation of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act include: (a) the accused has been sentenced to a fine and twice a fine due to the same kind of crime; (b) the accused has not been convicted of a fine in depth; (c) the accused has not been convicted of a fine exceeding the fine; and (d) the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are revealed in the record, are considered to be determined as ordered