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

On February 8, 2016, the Defendant was subject to notification by C as a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, on the ground that the Defendant did not go through the patrol road from the Cheongju-si Office to the Cheongju-si Office on February 8, 2016.

The defendant from around 17:54 on February 8, 2016 to the same year.

2. From 17:34 on March 13, 14, the police officers, including C, guards D, guards, E, and patrolmen, who were dissatisfied with the above notification disposition, sent a telephone at the B District Office, and expressed a desire and intimidation to the police officers, including the victim’s security guards, C, security guards D, security guards, E, and patrolmen, and “if the police officers were to enter the Republic of Korea, and if the police officers were to have participated in the war, they shall not be subject to during during the period of up to 124 times.” The police officers, who continued to go through the phone and put the phone from the next police officer to “C where they go to anywhere, she will go to, shes, shespath, shes, and shes her death,” were compelled to put the phone on the B District for about 124 occasions.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by the police officers related to the receipt of reports and the 112 visit work.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. 12 reported case handling table, respectively;

1. Written descriptions of D, E, and F;

1. Inquiries into written notification;

1. Recording-recording files and CDs in 112 reported;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes for communication data inquiry and replys (sk telecom);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that the defendant repents the wrongness, and the fact that the elderly and health conditions are not good) of the suspended sentence (the scope of the recommended sentence) is the case where the degree of assault, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor.