A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On June 26, 2017, the Defendant: (a) was on the street in front of the “D Hanwon” located in Franchising C around 15:38 on June 26, 2017; (b) reported by the Defendant to the effect that “the Defendant was able to have caused an accident by interfering with the course of the vehicle,” and reported by the Defendant to the effect that “the Defendant was able to punish the Defendant accurately.”

It is not necessary to see whether she will sheleep F in F, shelick, shelick, and booms.

A brush, a brush, expressed a brush with a large amount of frush, and expressed a brush with the face of the said F once by hand, and a brush assaulted the chest part of the said F by drinking at 2 to 3 times.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on 112 reporting and crime control.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the witness F in the second public trial record;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of the police statement protocol to G;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [the scope of recommendation] : (a) the basic area (from June to June 1) (the person subject to special sentencing) ; (b) there is no person subject to sentencing ; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he had the record of being issued a summary order of KRW 2 million due to interference with the execution of official duties in the Gwangju District Court Branch on October 27, 2009; (d) however, the Defendant committed the instant crime on October 27, 2009, by taking full account of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the record, including the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects on the execution of official duties.