Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On February 9, 2015, the Defendants: (a) requested the Defendants to leave the above special room to hear the statements from the just of the police box belonging to the police box belonging to the Seoul Gangseo-gu Police Station G and the just of the police box dispatched to the site after receiving 112 reports on employment of Downas among women and Downas who enjoy entertainment in the second floor of the building D, Gangnam-gu, Seoul; (b) Defendant A, while taking a bath, was put in the above G with the tables located in the said site; and (c) Defendant B, while taking a bath, took the body of the above H in his hand and took the cell phone, and took the h's arms in order to prevent any defect in taking the cell phone by the above H.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with the above G and H, and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of the police officers in relation to the prevention and suppression of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement related to G and H;

1. A written statement prepared in the I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to two copies of image output photographs;

1. Defendants of relevant criminal facts: Articles 136 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Commercial concurrent defendants: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants on probation: Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: one month to five years; and

2. Application of the sentencing guidelines (amended by October 1, 2014) (the scope of recommendation) (the scope of punishment for the obstruction of performance of official duties) to the basic area (six months to one year and four months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties.

3. The Defendants, who received the declaration of sentence, interfere with the duty of the police officer to properly regulate the instant crime without any special reason. However, there is no record of punishment before Defendant A, and Defendant B did not have any specific criminal record other than the fine, the Defendants make confessions and reflects, and other circumstances, attitudes, and crimes of the instant crime.