Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment for four months.

However, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, Defendant.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A

A. On June 13, 2014, the Defendant of the obstruction of performance of official duties: (a) around 22:10, the Defendant expressed his desire to “E” restaurant located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; (b) expressed his desire to the above restaurant customers and received a report of the above restaurant operator’s 112; and (c) received a check from the victim G (32 years of age) who is the police officer belonging to the F District of the YY and the slope H belonging to the same district; and (d) expressed the victim’s desire to “I will come to come to the front of the F District of the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu; and (e) took the victim’s working uniform in his hand; (e) she saws, she saws with his body; and (e) took the wheel by using a saw.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

B. In the time and place indicated in the preceding paragraph, the Defendant expressed expressed the victim’s desire to assault the victim G at the time and place, as seen above, and among several customers on the restaurant operator and his name in the name of the proprietor, the Defendant expressed the victim “Iskn’s flue, chphe, chphe, flue, flue, flue, fluor, fluor, flue, fluor, fluor, fluor, fluor.”

Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim.

2. Defendant B, at the time, at the place, and at the same time and place as indicated in paragraph (1), the Defendant arrested the victim H(40 years of age), a police officer as indicated in paragraph (1) due to the suspicion of obstruction of performance of official duties, as a flagrant offender, and the victim abused the victim’s arms on several occasions in order to avoid any defect in taking the lock against A and to interfere with it.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the handling of the 112 reported case by police officers and legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement related to G and H;

1. The investigation report (the statement of the arbitr);