A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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 November 10, 2015, at around 00:02, the Defendant insultd the victim publicly by referring to a large sound, such as “this son, governance, and so on” among the victim, who was sent to the scene by having received 112 reports on his own urology in front of the C cafeteria in front of the C cafeteria, and who was sent to the site after being reported 112 days from the day on which he was sent to the said restaurant and the date of his own urology due to his act of his urology, and who was sent to the site by the police station D Raman E, who was living in the police station, and received 3 to 4 personal information from the victim,

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the time and place specified in the foregoing paragraph 1, and at the place specified in the same paragraph, to the above F, who asked the Defendant to ask him/her about his/her personal information in order to deal with the instant case against the d district guard of the police station located in the street room and the suspicion of insult and insult.

“In doing so, the police officers’ legitimate performance of duties related to the handling of 112 reported duties were obstructed by assaulting the F F’s right-hand bucks one time to walk.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each police statement made to E, F, and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (on-site situations, etc.);

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Social Service Order (the scope of a recommendation) is that there is no person who has a basic area (from June to January 1) (the special sentencing person) (the decision of sentencing person) [the decision of sentencing] that there is no criminal history exceeding the same criminal record or fine for the defendant, and the defendant's age, sex and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be sentenced as the order.