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

On October 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) in order to identify the details of the report to the police officers of the foregoing E, etc., who were the police officers of the Gwangjin-gu Police Station D (30 tax) dispatched after receiving a report from 112 from the driver of the vehicle in front of C at the time of light lighting around 05:17 and the driver of the vehicle in front of C at the time of vision, and the police officers of E (30 tax) who were the police officers of the Gi

C. At the same time, the above E performs a dangerous act as he / she gets her hand while she takes a bath, such as “dumhus,” and does so, and in order to increase this, he / she takes part in PDA.

In other words, the Dazer diced the above E's loss, which he saw as a PDA, was assaulted.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes by cutting down a black stuff image;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (see, e.g., the confession and reflect of a crime by the defendant, and the primary charge);

1. The community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;