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

1. On August 2, 2017, at around 03:25, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s motherel business by force for about 25 minutes, such as the so-called “E” 308 front corridor 308, under the influence of alcohol from the victim D (n, 64 years of age) located in Jin-si, Jin-si, Jin-si, Seoul, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s motherel business by using force for about 25 minutes, such as spraying fire extinguishers at the front corridor 308.

2. On August 2, 2017, the Defendant was at around 04:05, at the place specified in the foregoing paragraph 1, and on the same reason, the Defendant was asked from G of the police officer G belonging to the Jinju Police Station F District, who was dispatched after receiving 112 a report, about the background of the foregoing paragraph 1, and was given a bath to the said G, on one occasion at the victim’s head.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on 112 reporting handling affairs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D, G, and H;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Abandon photograph of a assaulted part;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs by capturing CCTVs;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 136 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including observation of protection and community service order;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) Class 1 - The sentence of recommending interference with the performance of official duties: Six months to one year and six months (basic areas): None of them;

(b) 2nd offence - The sentence of recommending interference with business: one month to eight months (the area of mitigation): No penalty shall be imposed.

2. On July 16, 2004, the sentencing factors and the Defendant issued a summary order of a fine of two million won by obstructing the performance of official duties at the Changwon District Court. On August 23, 2011, in addition to imprisonment for the same crime, four months, in addition to imprisonment for a period of two years with prison labor, in the Changwon District Court's Jinju Branch branch on August 23, 201, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, the background and means of this case.