A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that 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

At around 01:02 on June 4, 2014, the Defendant: (a) sent a police box belonging to the Chungcheongnam-gu Police Station, Chungcheongnam-gu; (b) reported that the Defendant did not pay the drinking value; and (c) sent the drinking value to the police officer G and the superintendent of the police station belonging to the Chungcheongnam-gu Police Station, Chungcheongnam-gu; and (d) the Defendant expressed that “I would be able to impine. I would like to me. I would like to me. I would like to me. I would like to me. I would like to me. I would like to me. I would like to ambling in the above G; (d) I would like to me to sat down the sat and chest of the above H each time; and (d) assault the said G to walk the bridge to the satch.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to D, H and G

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

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

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (amended by the sentencing guidelines) of the suspended sentence [the range of punishment to be imposed in accordance with the law] The reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (amended by the sentencing guidelines): the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, and the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, and the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties by exercising violence against police officers who perform official duties, and the act of using unfair external force has no choice but to affect the maintenance of public peace and order through the maintenance of public order and order through the maintenance of public order. Thus, the crime of this case by the defendant is not proper.

Accordingly, the defendant is selected to be sentenced to imprisonment.

On the other hand, the Defendant committed the instant crime.