A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

At around 21:40 on May 17, 2016, the Defendant: (a) informed 112 police officers belonging to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Police Station D District Unit of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Police Station that she was seated on the road; (b) informed her employees belonging to E of the D District Unit of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Police Station that she was working on the road; and (c) asked her employees to get out of the patrol vehicle of the above E to get out of the patrol vehicle of this case; (d) told her “I am to get out of the patrol vehicle, I am to get out of the patrol vehicle of this case, I am to write off the left shoulder of the above E on one occasion; and (d) assaulted the part of the above E once in drinking.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( considered favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing following the suspended sentence);

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.;

1. Reviewing the sentencing criteria [Scope of recommending punishment] Basic sphere of the obstruction of performance of official duties (the obstruction of performance of official duties and coercion of official duties) (two months of imprisonment to one year and four months);

2. An offense of obstruction of performance of official duties is not good in that it interferes with the exercise of national public authority, and the defendant has a record of having been subject to criminal punishment several times due to violent crimes.

The favorable circumstances include the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime of this case, that the degree of violence is not severe, and that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine after around 1979.

The Criminal Act, including the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, is revealed in the records of this case.