A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six 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 July 29, 2019, the Defendant: (a) stated that the Defendant was frightened in front of the C convenience store located in Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu; (b) stated that the Defendant was frightened from the D District Guard E around the Seoul Nowon-gu Seoul Nowon-gu Police Station, called “I will not be fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright fright.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in the 112 reported case.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. 112 Report sheet, work log;

1. Investigation report ( cell phone images taken by police officers);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes by capturing a video;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation;

1. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of type] the obstruction of performance of official duties [Type 1]/ the obstruction of performance of official duties [the scope of recommendation field and recommendation range] there is no person subject to the coercion of official duties] (the scope of recommendation field and recommendation range] basic area, six months to one year and six months;

2. Considering the fact that the Defendant’s decision-making on sentence uses force against the police officers called out after receiving a report on the disturbance at a restaurant under the influence of alcohol, the crime’s nature is not good, and it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant in order to protect the legitimate performance of official duties of the State and to establish a sound social order.

On February 13, 2013, the Defendant had a record of criminal punishment on several occasions, including a previous conviction of a fine of one million won due to the crime of causing property damage.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and opposed to the mistake.

The extent of violence against police officers is not severe, and the defendant is not more severe.