A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six 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

On September 15, 2018, the Defendant: (a) reported on September 23:25, 2018, in front of a drinking house located in the same city, Jung-gu, Seoul, and reported on 112 in front of a 901, that “taxing engineer and Si guard,” and sent to the scene, and (b) deemed C to have heard the statements from a taxi engineer and passengers, and (c) said C was “4 police officers or three police officers or four police officers or four police officers or more in any way other than day-to day-day”; (b) said C was able to take the above C’s chest on one hand to have the Defendant take a cell phone at the scene and receive punishment for obstruction of the performance of official duties; (c) said C was able to have the Defendant take the front of the 112 report while handling the 112 report.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officials on the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of each police statement about D and C;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Investigation Report (Listening to Call Statement by Twitnesser E) (The defendant asserted that D took his cell phone to the effect that D was used to prevent him from doing so, and that D did not assault D. However, according to the evidence above, it can be acknowledged that D, a police officer, took a cell phone site twice when D took the cell phone site, and the mobile phone taken by D was cut off on the ground. Thus, the above argument is rejected.) The above argument is not accepted.

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is against the defendant's wrongness, there is no same criminal record, and the degree of obstruction of performance of official duties and the record are stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.