A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four 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

1. On November 12, 2013, the Defendant obstructed the Defendant’s business of interfering with the Plaintiff’s business of selling tickets by force by means of force, such as under the influence of under the influence of the Defendant, on the ground that the victim E, who is the tickets salesman, does not change the remaining money in the ticket ticket box D located in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

2. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) of this Article, was 112 to return home from the victim G who was called out after receiving 112 report, and the victim G was frighted to fright, and frighted the victim with his illness once again, and frighted the victim’s ship. As a result, he was arrested in the act of obstruction of performance of official duties by committing a crime of obstruction of official duties and was under investigation in the Fbuck area, and thereby interfered with the victim’s legitimate performance of official duties on one occasion.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Witnesses G and E respective legal statements;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to G and E;

1. Article 136 (1) and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstruction of performance of official duties) concerning the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment: The choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37 and Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The judgment of the defendant and his defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of probation and community service order is denying all of the facts of construction. However, considering the evidence duly examined and adopted by this court, the facts charged that the defendant interfered with the sale of the victim E's tickets by force, and assaults against the dispatched police officer, etc., all of the charges of obstructing the performance of official duties are recognized

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant denies all the crimes of the defendant and takes all the responsibility to the victims, and the light of public authority such as this case is common.