A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, 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. On November 6, 2016, the Defendant, within the C cafeteria located in Kimpo-si B 103, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, 112, and requested confirmation of the Defendant’s personal information, the Defendant expressed that “the President’s resident identification card should be verified first, and the tax base calculation of tax revenue and tax revenue within the Guide, shot-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Parkpo-si, Parkpo-si, Kimpo-si, Parkpo-si, Parkpo-si, and his face, thereby hindering the legitimate performance of official duties on the report of 112 reports of E.

2. On November 6, 2016, at around 05:0, the Defendant, within the office of the F Team office of the 65 Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, 795, Kimpo-si, 795, a flagrant offender, such as paragraph 1, arrested the Defendant on charges of obstructing the performance of official duties, and three police officers, such as the police captain G, etc., belonging to the above police station, transferred the Defendant to the detention room and resisting the defect, and interfere with the Defendant’s legitimate performance of official duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to G and E;

1. On-site photographs;

1. 112 A list of reported cases;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged by harming victims;

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

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, the sentence like the disposition shall be determined by comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) the crime of this case where the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Suspension of Execution Act prevents police officers from performing their legitimate official duties; (b) the defendant has a record of criminal punishment several times of violence; (c) the victim G does not want punishment against the defendant; (d) the defendant has no record of having been punished due to interference with the performance of official duties; (e) the defendant reflects his mistake; and (e) the treatment is being