The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On September 5, 2017, the Defendant: (a) received a report from D hotel entrance located in Daegu Suwon-gu C, and received questions about personal information from F, who was dispatched to the site at the entrance of the hotel; (b) expressed that “I am out of d. Ga mae, h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h.h.h.); and (c) expressed to F, “I h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h.h. h.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the handling of reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A report on investigation, a report on investigation (with respect to the investigation of CCTVs of D hotels) - Application of the Act and subordinate statutes ofCCTV;

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. A fine of two million won to be suspended;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties requires strict punishment as a crime prejudicial to the State’s function by nullifying a legitimate exercise of public authority, but on the other hand, the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects in depth, and there is no record of crime. The crime in this case was committed by the defendant by force, and circumstances are considered in light of the circumstance, and the degree of violence is relatively heavy, and the victim police officer does not want the punishment of the defendant, and the agreement is made by paying compensation for damage to the victim police officer, and the victim police officer does not want the punishment of the defendant).