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

1. On April 15, 2014, at around 12:34, 2014, the Defendant damaged the victim’s property by walking the consignee, who is the owner of Busan Traffic Corporation, in a location where the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the C subway Station Customer Service Center, and by communicating the Defendant to outside the safe subway line and to D who is the cause of the said subway service, and without any justifiable reason, sending the Defendant to the said customer center and protecting the Defendant.

2. At the time and place set forth in paragraph (1), the Defendant: (a) took a bath at the C subway Station Customer Service Center, in which the victim D performs his/her duties at the time and place set forth in paragraph (1) and without any justifiable reason, took a breath of “culp, fla,” and interfered with the victim’s service personnel duties by taking advantage of approximately 30 minutes of pulse failure.

3. At the time and place mentioned in Paragraph 1, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, as described in Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 2 above, the Defendant obstructed the police officer’s legitimate execution of duties concerning the mobilization of the report 112 report by the police officer on the ground that the police officer F of the Busan Coast Guard E box belonging to the Busan Coast Guard Station, who was called out after receiving a report that the Defendant spacing the Defendant’s drinking spacing, spacing the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (on-site CCTV image investigations);

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order [the scope of recommending punishment] is the obstruction of performance of official duties.