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

At around 02:40 on October 11, 2018, the Defendant returned to the scene after receiving a report from 112 on the front side of the B apartment Cdong, and returned home, and the Defendant: (a) was under the influence of alcohol, and the Defendant was frighted from the above E that he gets on and off a bicycle while drinking; (b) was threatening to fright to go on and off a horse; and (c) was fright to be at the time of drinking; and (d) was fright to “fright, fright, or fright by the police, dint,” and was frighted to “fright-on-on-way, fright-on-way, fright-on-ro, the chest part of the breast part of E, which was frighted once.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the maintenance of public peace and order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. To apply statutes on the receipt of penalty and the handling of 112 reported cases;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with labor for one month to five years;

2. Where the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended sentence] is minor as the mitigation area (one month to eight months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (special mitigation), and the extent of violence, intimidation, deceptive scheme, or obstruction of official duties is minor;

3. The criminal defendant's decision on the sentence of this case reflects the recognition of the crime of this case, the degree of violence is minor, the victim police officers have agreed with it, and the defendant has been punished three times by a fine due to drinking driving. Meanwhile, the defendant committed the crime of this case against the police officers who issued the penalty by stopping it to protect public safety and the defendant by attempting to get a bicycle while drinking at the time of this case. The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties needs to be strictly punished as a crime prejudicial to the function of the State by nullifying a legitimate exercise of public authority, and other crimes harmful to the function of the State.