A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 22, 2017, the Defendant: (a) demanded the Defendant to leave the police station located within the office of the police station located in the aged group B on June 22, 2017; (b) however, the Defendant refused to leave the police station by taking advantage of the circumstances where the police station was assigned to the police station and the police officer E, and (c) demanded the said police officer to leave the station at least three times on the ground of interference with his/her duties, but the Defendant refused to leave the station for about 45 minutes after taking it out on the floor of the police station from around 22:10 to around 22:55.

2. On June 22, 2017, around 22:55, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, at the same place as the foregoing paragraph 1, sent the D’s request for withdrawal from the police station assigned to the said police station, and sent the D’s above D to the police station after having received a report of assault, and again sent the D’s request for withdrawal into the police station, and used the said D’s call “,” and used the blick blick blick blick blick, and used the blick blick blick blick blick at one time.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties for the police box service, the handling of reported cases, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (C police boxes, ctv video attachment);

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Articles 319(2) and 319(1) of the Criminal Act (in the case of refusing to withdraw), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (in the case of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Articles 136(1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment

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. The reasoning for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is that the Defendant was punished by a fine of three million won for interference with the performance of official duties in the year 2013, but the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects himself, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime contingently, the Defendant did not have any record of punishment heavier than the suspension of execution, the circumstances and degree of the instant crime, and all the circumstances, such as the record of the instant crime, etc., are considered. It is so ordered as per Disposition.