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

On June 14, 2015, at around 18:22, the Defendant: (a) received a 112 report on the “D main office of the “U.S.A. C building” in front of the “D main office in Bupyeong-si, Seocheon-si”; and (b) took a bath to “if the police officer assigned to the E box in the on-site, she would stop the business;” and (c) took a walk to “if the police officer goes to walk the bridge, she would walk the bridge; and (d) assault the breast and the boom by drinking.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning 112 reporting duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the 112 Reporting Case Handling Table;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that the defendant reflects his/her mistake and that there is only the fact that the defendant is punished once a fine is imposed);