Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

except that 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

1. Defendants’ conspiracy: around 18:10 on August 11, 2014, the Defendants conspired to interfere with their duties, and interfered with the victim’s main business for about 30 minutes by force, such as: (a) while drinking alcohol at the E main points operated by the victim D, which is operated by the victim D, Incheon Metropolitan City Gyeyang-si; and (b) making the customer feel too early and early drinking from other customers; (c) making the customer feel a heavy desire; and (d) making the customer feel a blick; and (e) making the customer feel a blick-down call from the victim; and (e) making the customer feel a blick-up call; and (e) making the customer feel a blick-up call; and (e) obstructing the victim’s main business by force.

2. Defendant A’s sole criminal conduct: The Defendant, at the above date and place of the obstruction of performance of official duties, received instructions from G policemen belonging to the F District Police Station of Incheon Gyeyang Police Station, to stop his conduct of obstruction of business and return home after calculating the drinking value, and took a bath to Defendant A’s “this dog, governance, and so on” and interfered with the police officers’ legitimate performance of duties concerning the police officer’s 112 report and the maintenance of public order and security, etc., by inserting his fingers into G policemen and placing them into G police officers’ seat, and putting them into his seat, and making them up for a long time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements concerning G and D;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendant A: Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstruction of performance of official duties), Articles 314(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of obstruction of official duties), the choice of imprisonment

B. Defendant B: Articles 314(1) and 30 (Interference with Business) of the Criminal Act; the choice of imprisonment

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (Defendant A): the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution: It shall be decided as per the Disposition for the reason that Article 62 (1) (in depths) or more of the Criminal Act is in force;