A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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 10, 2019, at around 15:18, the Defendant reported 112 the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B apartment 4’s corridor that “A she has a drinking door and opened the entrance.” At around 15:28, the Defendant called the Defendant to the Defendant’s 112 telephone call at the Defendant’s request for contact without the Defendant, who called the Defendant by means of a scopon., “I will not resolve why the reported case would be resolved, the police scopher’s death at the house,” and the Defendant called the Defendant to the above place at around 15:32, and the Defendant called the “I will prevent the death and death of the knife,” which is a dangerous object d getting off from the elevator.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous things and interfered with the execution of official duties by assaulting and threatening police officers who perform legitimate duties concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement by the prosecution concerning D;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to seizure records and photographs of seized articles;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Articles 144 (1) and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act which choose a penalty;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. A normal condition unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act: The act of putting the police officers called out is highly dangerous, and the knife is not good, and the defendant has been punished three times prior to the instant case, under favorable circumstances where the defendant had been punished for the obstruction of performance of official duties: The defendant is divided into his mistake and reflects, the defendant cannot be deemed to have suffered serious damage to the police officer's body, and the defendant made efforts for recovery from damage, such as deposit of money, etc. with the damaged police officer, and the defendant himself/herself.