A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 1, 2020, the Defendant, at around 06:25, 06:25, 'C' stores located in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, and 112 reported time expenses to other customers, requested the Defendant to change the number of the police officers belonging to the D Zone D District District of the Seoul Yongsan-gu, Seoul, and called 'Ne Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Hah,' which called 'Na Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Hah', Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of F’s written statement, investigation report (CCTV video verification and testimony confirmation of witness F) statute;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see the following reasons for sentencing)

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Services Criminal Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: One to five years of imprisonment;

2. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the punishment of imprisonment] the obstruction of performance of official duties [the category 1]/ the coercion of official duties [the scope of the recommended area and the punishment of recommendation] basic area, six months through one year and six months.

3. Determination of sentence: Punishment of a fine on four occasions by not later than June 2013, 1 year and June 2013, which was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of six months of imprisonment with prison labor, such as drunk driving, violation of special family law, violation of special family law, and violation of special family law, and subsequently, failing to overcome the problem of alcohol due to violent crimes, such as having the power investigated several times as violent crimes, and repeats the wrong; and the fact that it seems that the person did not have to be subject to punishment, considering the unfavorable circumstances, the degree of obstruction of performance of official duties is not more severe than the degree of contingent crimes, and the attitude that the person did not reflect shall be considered as favorable.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and behavior, career, details and motive of the crime, degree of violence, circumstances after the crime, possibility of recidivism, etc. are shown in the arguments in this case.