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

1. On February 27, 2016, from around 17:00 on the same day to 17:20 on the same day, the Defendant, who interfered with his/her duties, continued to drink in an indoor packing machine operated by the victim C in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, but the Defendant ordered that he/she drink in the form of alcohol.

B. The victim is not a customer to whom he or she would not serve in any manner on the ground that he or she does not serve in any manner.

“Along with the victim’s crypt operation by force, the victim’s crypt operation was interfered with due to the victim’s crypting of the chair, brying of the chair, and over about 20 minutes sound.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at around 17:26 on February 27, 2016, as described in paragraph 1 at the places described in paragraph 1 of the same Article, and reported by the Defendant that the Defendant carried a pedal, as described in paragraph 1, and the circumstances E (54 taxes, south) and F police officer assigned to the D Zone and called up for the arrival of the Defendant.

Before having ever taken a bath, such as “Isker, Isker,” and “Isker, Isker,” and the reason why E reads “Isker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Hasker’s Haskbbbbbb

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of police officers' duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the choice of imprisonment for each crime;

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

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act are against the defendant, the defendant has no record of crime other than a fine once, and the defendant has no record of crime other than a fine, and other various conditions of sentencing, including the circumstances, contents, age, sex, environment, etc. of the instant crime, shall be comprehensively taken into account, and the sentence shall be determined as ordered.