A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On September 7, 2016, the Defendant: (a) prepared a report on a summary trial of interference with business on the part of the Defendant: (b) on September 7, 2016 at the “C” telecom in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu; (c) on September 7, 2016, on the 112 report to the effect that he was drunk, and sent to the Defendant; and (d) prepared the report on a summary trial of interference with business to the Defendant, and (d) prepared the report on the instant trial of interference with business to the Defendant; and (d) died of the same type of flab where only drat

v. The Defendant expressed his desire to “ how the back of the Chewing gue will be e.g., why we will see?” and assaulted the two arms and the wall of the police officer in order to restrain the Defendant from entering the re-competing.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. - Application of work log legislation

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 on the stay of execution (see, e.g., Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (the confession of a criminal act and the attitude against a police officer), the degree of violence against a police officer is relatively minor, and there is no history of criminal punishment exceeding the previous

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;