A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment 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

On December 14, 2014, at around 06:45, the Defendant: (a) expressed that “the person, who performed the alcohol, did so to the owner of the store,” in front of the “D-type store” located in the C railroad station located in Busan City B, “D-type store,” was expressed as “the person, who was asked F of the instant case from the border F, located in the Busan East Police Station E-gu, Busan East Police Station, was called as “the person, who was called, was not the police,” and assaulted by the Defendant, by hand, the Defendant, who was asked about the instant situation from F.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning 112 report handling.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to police statements made to F and G;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] When the scope of mitigation area (one to eight months) of obstruction of performance of official duties (special mitigation) (special mitigation) is insignificant (decision of sentence] reflectivity, degree of assault, and deceptive scheme (decision of sentence), degree of violence, and fact that there is no record of punishment other than two times before and after a fine relating to old violence, etc.