A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that 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 February 21, 2019, at around 10:30 on February 10, 2019, the Defendant: (a) sent a report phone from Gangseo-gu Seoul, Gangseo-gu, Seoul; (b) the position of the D District Unit of the Seoul Gangseo Police Station D District; and (c) the border F, in front of the tables, laid down a defective kind of water on the tables to listen to the Defendant’s statement; (d) the Kimbbbbbbbbbbing the left side of E once.

At around 10:40 on the same day, the Defendant continued to use the F’s clothes at the D Zone of the Seoul Gangseo-gu Seoul Gangseo Police Station D District in Gangseo-gu Seoul, and used the F’s clothes one time to walk, while taking the Defendant’s desire to wear a disturbance by the light F.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on handling 112 reported cases and arrest and custody of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. A H statement;

1. Application of the statutes governing damaged photographs and CCTV CDs;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 136 (1) of the same Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “construent circumstances”) was that the Defendant, in the course of performing official duties by breathing the police officers in his uniform and exercising violence, such as breathing them, and breathing them.

Moreover, the crime that interferes with the police officer's performance of official duties needs to be punished strictly in order to establish the law and order of the state and eradicate the light of the public authority.

However, there is room to see that the defendant's mistake is recognized as a whole late and reflects in depth, and that it has reached an contingent crime because it is impossible to make a correct judgment on the situation while drinking more than the amount of liquor.