A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 10, 2017, the Defendant called up to D in Fababababababa C with a report of 112 stating that he does not pay the money for eating food to the said D business owner, and without any justifiable reason, “I are the police police officer,” who followed F of the police box affiliated with the police box of Fabababababa, which identified the reported details against the said D business owner;

C. The Baging theory, “Chovagy,” followed up about five times, thereby threatening F, as the vegetator F.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on 112 reporting and crime control.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and G;

1. Application of H’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommendation] There is no person [the person who has been subject to special sentencing] in the basic area (from June to one year and six months) (the person who has been subject to special sentencing] [the decision of sentencing] [the fact that there is no criminal history of the defendant being subject to criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, and that the defendant has led to confessions and reflects the crime of this case, and all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the record shall be determined as ordered