A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 17, 2014, at around 22:18, the Defendant: (a) called the Defendant’s son, wife, etc. during dialogueed with the Defendant to ascertain the details of the report, the Defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the investigation and crime prevention, etc. of the above E’s face on two occasions, by stating that “after the family examination of the Republic of Korea, the Defendant Do Police Station Dock, which was called up after receiving a report on domestic violence at the front of the Defendant’s house of the Defendant’s house, and called the Defendant’s home, “Israno and the offender within the Republic of Korea.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to A by the police;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

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;

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (6 months to one year and four months) of obstruction of performance of official duties (the special person who has been sentenced] [decision of sentence] The defendant shows an attitude that the defendant misleads and reflects the defendant, does not reach the degree of inflicting bodily injury on police officers, and there is a large number of criminal records related to drinking or violence and thus continuous guidance and supervision are deemed necessary.