A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall obstruct a fire fighter in the performance of his/her fire extinguishment, lifesaving or first-aid services by assaulting or threatening him/her.

Nevertheless, at around 19:20 on May 21, 2015, the Defendant: (a) called C Fire Fighting Station D, a fire fighting officer D belonging to C Fire Fighting Station, who was called upon the Defendant’s report that his father B had caused respiratory difficulties on the road located in Doldong-gun, had confirmed the above B’s resident registration number; (b) had his resident registration certificate and had his resident registration certificate; (c) threatened the Defendant with the defect that he would bring why he would bring why he would bring about; (d) the fire fighting officer of the said fire fighting station, who was called together with D, was sent to the said fire fighting station, who was sitting in the driver’s seat of the said vehicle, sent the said vehicle to the said fire fighting station, with a sound called “Wer Lee” and her hand, and unloaded the said vehicle by drinking.

After all, the Defendant interfered with emergency medical services by assaulting or threatening D or E, which is the cause of a fire brigade.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the prosecutor and the police accused;

1. Each statement of the police about D and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs, first-aid services logs, first-aid services logs (Evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6) and second-aid order;

1. Selection of imprisonment with labor under Article 50 subparagraph 1 (c) or Article 16 (2) of the Framework Act on Fire Services for the relevant criminal facts;

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 of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution is that the case is a matter of causing harm to public officials in the process of performing official duties and must be punished strictly.

However, the defendant reflects his depth and repents his mistake.

Furthermore, the victims do not want to punish the defendant.

In addition, it is decided as per Disposition by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances revealed in the investigation and trial of this case.