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

1. 업무 방해 피고인은 2017. 1. 17. 17:00 경부터 18:00 경 사이에 안동시 B에 있는 C 식당에서 술에 취해 혼자서 큰소리로 떠들고, 이를 만류하는 피해 자인 음식점 주인 D(46 세 )에게 “ 사장 언제 바꿨냐

C. A.L., unless the president;

IE. , e.g., g. g. g. g. g., g. g.s.

“In such a way that customers who find the disturbance, such as dump and flabing flaps, can play outside the restaurant, thereby obstructing the victim’s general restaurant business for about one hour.

2. On January 17, 2017, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, at the entrance of the above C cafeteria around 18:10 on January 17, 2017, instructed the disturbance as above at the entrance of the above C cafeteria, and asked the police guards E who called out after receiving a report to the police.

N. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L.I

왜 난리인데, 야 이 씹새끼야 ”라고 말하며 양 발로 경위 E의 다리 부위를 5~6 회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. A written statement of F and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (the attachment of photographs to victims, and CCTV verification);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 314(1) and 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) (the choice of imprisonment), which govern the 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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the conditions favorable to the following reasons for sentencing)

1. Scope of the recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Where the degree of interference with the execution of official duties is minor, such as assault, intimidation, deceptive scheme, or interference with the performance of official duties in the mitigated area (one month to eight months) of Class 1 (Interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of duties) (one month to eight months);

B. Disturbing business [the scope of recommended punishment] interference with business affairs, Type 1 (Interference with Business) [1-8 months] [the person who has been specially mitigated] interference with the mitigation area (damage.