A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 01:40 on November 7, 2020, the Defendant: (a) carried the Defendant’s house into the Defendant’s house in order to verify the safety of the reporting person who was not subject to telephone after 112 reporting domestic violence by C in de facto marital relations with the Defendant at the Defendant’s house located in Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu; (b) in order to check the safety of the reporting person who was sent to the site after 112 reporting domestic violence by C; (c) the police officer, who was a police officer belonging to the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Police Station Down-gu, which was called in de facto marital relations with the Defendant; and (d) tried to check the safety of the police officer’s house continuously entering the house; and (e) tried to check the safety of the police officer’s house; (e) cut the line by cutting the line of the Jin-gu dog, which is a dangerous object at the Defendant’s house; and (e) directed the police officer to the body of the police officer.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officials concerning the handling of reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. 112 A report processing table;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to field photographs (fields, damaged parts, opening photographs, etc.), on-site photographs (damage, etc.);

1. Article 144 (1) and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. According to Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence of the Criminal Act, in consideration of the following: (a) the Defendant’s reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is deemed to be bad in the nature of the crime by exercising violence against police officers in the course of performing official duties and threatening them by using the dog; (b) the extent of the Defendant’s use of violence against police officers is serious; (c) the Defendant recognizes the Defendant; (d) the Defendant has no power to commit the