A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 23, 2018, at around 20:40, the Defendant reported 112 to the third floor of the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Budio 20, the Defendant notified the police officers belonging to the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Police Station C district unit of the fact of water distribution from D, who called the Defendant, and notified the Defendant of the fact of water distribution to D, while taking a bath to the said D, and threatened the Defendant with the Defendant, which is a dangerous object in the said place, by gathering a test fluencing to the said D.

The Defendant, who is a dangerous object, carried with the police officer, thereby obstructing the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, investigation, maintenance of order, etc. of D's crime by threatening D's police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Each statement of E, F and G;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Relevant Article 144(1) and Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to seven years;

2. Scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [the range of punishment] of the obstruction of performance of official duties [the category 1]/ the coercion of official duties [the special salvator]: In the case of carrying dangerous articles (the area of recommendation and the scope of the recommended sentence] increased area, one year to 4 years by imprisonment.

3. Determination of sentence: Determination of sentence of sentence by taking full account of various circumstances that serve as the conditions for sentencing appearing in the records and arguments of this case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, including the fact that the Defendant had been prior to the same suspended sentence, but appears to be recognized and reflected in the crime; and