A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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

On March 22, 2014, at around 23:40, the Defendant: (a) heard the Defendant’s speech that he was drinking at C cafeteria located in Gumi-si B, and that he would pay the drinking value to the proprietor from the slope E belonging to the D District of the Gu American Police Station D District, which was called upon 112 report; (b) “A police officer and sprinke, who were sent to E, fried, fried, friened, friened, friened, and friened, friened by how much the age of friened fried frib frien, so that this fried frien frien ften had no frien frien frien frien f

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning E's patrol and suppression of crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (Article 62 (1) of the same Act (Article 62 (3) of the same Act (Article 62 (1) of the same Act shall be strictly punished, considering the fact that violence has been committed three times, one of them is a previous offense before the suspension of execution, and the degree of taking into consideration the fact that the confession of crime and reflects

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. of Social Service Orders;