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

At around 02:20 on September 11, 2016, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at Cjus located in Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si, and was under the influence of alcohol and was under control by E in the circumstances belonging to the 112-report and dispatched to the site, and received a request for returning home after leaving the said Cjus in front of the said Cjus, the Defendant expressed the above E as follows: (a) “Choe, knee, knee, knee, knee, kne, kne, and kin” to the said E; (b) threatened the police mother of the said E on his hand, with his hand, and (c) threatened the above E head at one time in drinking.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in regard to the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of F’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (6-1-4 months) of obstruction of performance of official duties (6-1-1-4 months) [decision of sentence] [decision of sentence] Defendant has a record of being sentenced to fines twice for the same kind of crime, and the time when committing a crime and reflects it, etc., the punishment shall be determined as per the disposition of this case, taking into account various sentencing conditions shown in the trial procedure of this case.