A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 15, 2018, at around 22:20, the Defendant interfered with the business of the victim C’s restaurant in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around January 15, 2018, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force, such as taking a part in the said restaurant while under the influence of alcohol, taking a part in the said restaurant without any particular reason, taking the part in the said restaurant, and seeing the urine on the floor of the said restaurant, thereby obstructing the victim’s restaurant business by force.

2. On January 15, 2018, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, was written at the above D cafeteria, and the Defendant was written by the principal operator.

“Seoul, who was called upon receipt of a report 112, has obstructed the police officer’s 112 report processing duties and the legitimate execution of duties concerning the investigation of the case, by arresting the Defendant as a police officer belonging to the Pyeongtaek Police Station E police box, and arresting the Defendant as a flagrant offender at the same time, and by taking the face of the above F on one occasion, the police officer’s 112 report processing duties and the investigation of the case.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to F or C by the police;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business, the choice of imprisonment), and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties and the choice of imprisonment) concerning the crime;

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 on the observation of protection and order to attend lectures;

1. Scope of the recommended punishment on the sentencing guidelines: Crimes (Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties) No. 1 (Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties) and No. 2 (Obstruction of Duties) in the basic area (from June to June), No. 1) (Scope of the recommended punishment) [Scope of the Punishment] in the mitigation area (from January to August), (special mitigation person] in the mitigation area (from January to August), in the reduction area (a special mitigation person] in the final sentence scope due to the aggravation of the punishment of the majority who is not subject to aggravated punishment: 6 months to October 1:

2. The fact that the form of the act of obstructing the decision-making process of sentence is not very good, and that it is not good that the contents and nature of the crime are committed by assaulting the police officer in the field following the obstruction of business, and that it is not good to commit the crime (2017).