A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On March 4, 2015, the Defendant damaged property: (a) around 21:30, the victim D (Woo, 54 years old) in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City in a large lux currency with the customer of the next seat in the “E” restaurant operated by the Defendant; (b) the victim released the Defendant out of the restaurant, and did not open the door; (c) the victim did not open the door; and (d) by walking the above restaurant door several times, the transparent board of plastic material that was put in the door door of the entrance door was removed from the door door; and (d) the said transparent board was faced with the front door of the entrance.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the above entrance door and the front door that could not know the market price owned by the victim.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the above date, time, and place, and when receiving a report on the above disturbance by the Defendant, and attempted to arrest the Defendant as a flagrant offender due to the charge of property damage by the chip G of the F District District of the Seoul Gwanak Police Station F District, Seoul, which called the Defendant, at the above time and place, and assaulted twice the chest part of the above G by walking.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of police officers in flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to G or D;

1. A H statement;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (to hear statements made by victims D, witness H and victim police officers' statements);

1. Relevant Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is against the defendant's recognition of the crime, the degree of damage and the exercise of tangible force are relatively insignificant, the victim of property damage does not want to be punished, the defendant does not have any criminal record above the suspended sentence, the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and the arguments in this case.