A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

around 00:20 on September 14, 2016, the Defendant: (a) reported 112 on the road in front of Mapo-gu Seoul; (b) brought up a cell phone with a police officer D, etc. affiliated with the Seoul Mapo Police Station C commander of the Seoul Mapo Police Station, who was called up after being reported 112 to the effect that “the people enjoy on a tea road”; and (c) brought up a cell phone with the above D’s knee-com one time of drinking, etc. without any reason to put up the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties by police officers on crime prevention.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending sentence] of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [the grounds for sentencing] that there is no basic area (6 to 1 year and 4 months) of the Act on the Suspension of Performance of Official Duties (the scope of recommending punishment] [the decision of sentencing] [the defendant has the record of being sentenced to the criminal punishment of a fine for the same kind of crime. However, although the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case and repents his mistake, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, and there is no record of criminal punishment other than the fine, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered in the argument of this case.