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

The Defendant, at around 13:35 on May 28, 2017, sent to another police officer, on the road in front of Gosung-gun B, and from the 119 first-aid crew members, the Defendant, upon receiving a report from 112, carried out an article to D, who is a police box belonging to the Gosung Police Station C, called the Defendant, and without any justifiable reason, carried out an article to the police officer.

“Absinging and taking a bath,” and then called “Absing the police box affiliated with the same police box,” “Absing to “Absing the head of the Gu,” and “Absing the particulars of the case from the 119 first aid crew members, and explaining the Defendant’s procedures, and “pinger continues to be the head of the Si/Gun/Gu.”

The me called "the inside of Korea-do me had gone to the Twelian Educational Team", and the head came to the mel, the mel of the above E, the breast of the above E in drinking, and the breast of the above D in drinking, which caused it by hand, was pushed down.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to D, E, and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (to attach a copy of the work log for the 112 Report Report Processing and C police box, to attach on-site photographs, and to attach photographs by cutting off 119 first-aid vehicles cream records);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to five years; and

2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment] and the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (no person subject to special sentencing] shall interfere with the performance of public duties.

3. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and is against the recognition of the sentence, and that the Defendant was suffering from heavy depression and alcohol, and thus, led to the instant crime in the course of dispute with the wife refusing to report on 119 to receive hospital treatment.