1. Around 18:29 on December 20, 2018, the Defendant interfered with the business, on the ground that: (a) the victim and her husband resisted that he/she was defective in the mouth of “D” on the 3rd floor of Busan Dong-gu, Busan, which was operated by the victim B; and (b) the victim and her husband resisted that he/she was found to have been defective in the mouth of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length of the arm’s length.

2. The Defendant expressed that, at the above time and place of the obstruction of performance of official duties, at the above time and place, the 112 report was sent to the Busan East Police Station EdistrictF affiliated with the Busan East Police Station, who was asked to ask the above F to the circumstances of the instant case, “I am on hand, there is no reason why the CCTV was dint in the billiard, and there is no proper investigation.”

Defendant continued to see, “Is the following: (a) the Defendant she had been dumpeded to B, who was the business owner of the above billiard room, and dumpeded to dump B, and she was sumped to the right side of the said F, and she was sumped to sumped to sump and sumped to the front side of the said F.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning B and F;

1. Application of each statute on photographs of damage;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for one to seven years;

2. The types of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria.