A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On March 3, 2018, the Defendant: (a) 22:30, at the blind distance in front of D Mart located in the Busan Shodong-gu, Busan, and (b) 112, after receiving a report from the 112 taxi engineer and the police box in front of the police box in the science and technology police station Embs, which called the Defendant, heard the statement from the cab engineer about the vision of the Defendant, etc.; (b) sent the cab engineer to the cab; and (c) sent the cab engineer to the Gyeong F; and (d) assaulted the f of the Gyeong F by drinking, etc. on two occasions.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on handling 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and H:

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Type 1 (Interference with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) in the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (a person who has a special sentencing factor) of the sentencing criteria; and

2. The crime of this case, which was sentenced to sentence, is a matter of obstructing a police officer’s legitimate performance of official duties by drinking the chest of a police officer called out after receiving a report from a taxi engineer or a police officer, and the crime of this case requires a strict punishment for the crime of obstructing a police officer’s performance of official duties in order to establish a state’s legal order and eradicate the light of public authority.

However, the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, and the defendant does not repeat the same mistake again.

The circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant has hardened, and there is no record of punishment in excess of the same criminal record or fine, and other circumstances favorable to the defendant, the age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive for the crime.