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

On January 4, 2015, at around 03:20, the Defendant reported that the Defendant continued to open and sound the door at the front corridor of D, which was located in the 303rd of the building C, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, the Defendant: (a) was a sloping police box belonging to the Ulsan Police Station Emba, which was being used by the Defendant as a hand to the patroler, and (b) around 04:10 on the same day, the Defendant was serving as the guard of the Emba, the police box belonging to H, F, and the above G, who was called out after receiving a report that the Defendant continued to open and sound the front door at the corridor of the above D’s house, and, at around 04:10 on the same day, the Defendant went to the above H, F, and the above G.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the handling of reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (Attachment of a photograph), report of internal investigation (a copy of the service log of a police box) and report of internal investigation (limited to attachment of a field photograph);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act (a punishment provided for in the crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties against police officers F and the crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties against police officers G, and punishment provided for in the crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties against F, of which the quality of each crime is heavier

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act heavier than that of concurrent crimes;

4. Aggravation of concurrent crimes resulting from the crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties committed on around 04:10.

1. A variety of guidelines are set out in the sentencing guidelines, including the following: (a) the Defendant was not identical to that of the Defendant under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act; (b) the Defendant was only punished once by a fine; and (c) the F, the victimized police officer, appears to have stated to the effect that the Defendant would be punished against the Defendant to an investigative agency; and (d) the Defendant’s mistake is divided and reflected against him