The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On March 18, 2016, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of charges against the Defendant and sentenced the Defendant to four months of imprisonment.

The Defendant appealed on the ground that the sentencing was unfair, and the judgment prior to the sending of the case was repeated by the Defendant’s false report, and the police officer who received the report was called out, the Defendant found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that Article 3(3)2 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act of the Republic of Korea is insufficient to deem that the Defendant’s act was likely to be punished as a crime of interference with the performance of official duties by fraudulent means under Article 137 of the Criminal Act with a high statutory penalty, and that the act is obviously beyond the illegality of the act and the consequence, and constitutes exceptional cases. However, the Defendant found the Defendant guilty of violating the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act within the scope of the same charges.

Accordingly, the prosecutor appealed on the acquittal part of the judgment above on the ground of misunderstanding of legal principles.

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the court prior to the remanding of the case on the ground that it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant’s act interfered with specific execution of duties concerning the protection of the police officer’s life, body, and property, etc., on the ground that it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant’s act interfered with the police officer’s specific performance of duties concerning the protection of the police officer’s life, body, and property, etc., and the case was remanded to the court of the first instance.

The decision of the court below on the grounds of appeal (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Although the defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution for the same crime, the crime of this case is again committed during the period of suspended execution.