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

1. On August 10, 2017, the Defendant interfering with the Defendant’s business: (a) on the part of the victim D in Busan Northern-gu, Busan, the victim D’s “Em cafeteria” operated by the victim D on August 10, 2017; (b) on the part of the victim, who received a demand from the victim for a demand that boomed her bbb and her half around the brea, and that the victim would request the victim from the victim who would face the brub to leave the bru.

The purpose of this Chewing sark, etc. was to make a bath with a large sound, and to prevent customers who want to enter the place by avoiding the disturbance for about 25 minutes from that time.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's operation of the restaurant by force.

2. At around 13:50 on August 10, 2017, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties: (a) in the “E cafeteria”; (b) in the “E cafeteria”; (c) the police officer G, the police officer of the Busan Northern Police Station, called out after receiving 112 a report while avoiding the disturbance, listen to the details of the report from the business owner; and (d) recommended the Defendant to return home to the Defendant; and (e) the said G to the effect that the Defendant “pack kick kb kb kb kb kb k

Cr. Hear Baz Baba

The expression "", etc. was made with the face of the above G, and the head of the drink was sealed by hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention and suppression of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D and G;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the choice of imprisonment for each crime;

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

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

1. It interferes with the proper performance of official duties by the police officers dispatched for the reason of the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, and interferes with the defendant's lawful performance of duties. However, the defendant has no criminal record of a fine or heavier, and has agreed with the victim of the crime of interference with duties.