A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for six months, for each of the defendants B.

However, this decision is delivered to the Defendants.

1. On October 5, 2016, Defendant A, on the front day of the EKa P, located in Gumi-si around 23:40 on October 5, 2016, Defendant A, at the slope G, and patrolmen, H fighted “.”

“On receipt of the report 112, the Defendant called the 112 report, and told the Defendant, who was suffering from the disturbance, booming the beer’s disease, but assaulted the beer’s disease, which is a dangerous object to G, such as the beer’s disease, and the chest part of G and H’s chest part in the head.

Accordingly, the defendant, using dangerous objects, interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of reported cases.

2. Defendant B, at the time and place described in paragraph 1, and on the grounds that the above G and H were arrested a flagrant offender committing an act of interference with the performance of official duties by committing assault, such as taking a bath, keeping the body of H, keeping the body of H, and taking the parts such as G into drinking, taking the knife, taking the knife, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement made in relation to I, H and G;

1. A place where he works for the F District;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the field and police officers' photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

(a) Defendant A: Articles 144(1) and 136(1) of the Criminal Act;

B. Defendant B: Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial competition;

(a) Defendant A: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (a) (the punishment imposed on a person who interferes with the performance of a special duty by another person, and a punishment imposed on a person who interferes with the performance of a special duty by another person with heavier punishment);

(b) Defendant B: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the punishment imposed on a person who interferes with the execution of official duties between the persons who interfere with the performance of official duties, and the punishment imposed on a person who interferes with the performance of official duties with heavier G);

1. The Defendants’ choice of punishment: Imprisonment with prison labor

1. Defendants subject to suspended execution: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing as set forth below);

1. Defendants of a community service order: Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant A has received a report.