Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

On April 10, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor due to interference with the performance of official duties in the Sungnam Support of Suwon Friwon, and completed the execution of the sentence at a female prison on August 28, 2014.

1. On January 28, 2017, around 15:50 on January 28, 2017, the Defendant interfered with the business, damage property: (a) the Defendant took a bath for another customer at the “D coffee shop” (hereinafter referred to as the “victim E-1”) located in Busan Jung-gu (hereinafter referred to as the “victim E-1”) on the ground that another customer was frighted; and (b) the Defendant frighted the column, such as cutting back the instant cup into the Korean petroleum column on the floor of the coffee shop and cutting down the Korean petroleum column in the coffee shop. (c) Around 17:05, 15 minutes later, the Defendant sought again at the said coffee shop and his employees and customers “a person who does not want to do so” Da Da Da n.

10 Gags Byung, etc., which were followed by the phrase “, were 10 glass bars, followed by the tables, followed by a shot, etc.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the coffee shop business of the victimized person by force, and damaged the market price of the damaged person, such as 3, 3, 2, 2, 1, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, and

2. Around 19:00 on the same day, the Defendant was arrested in flagrant offender at the Busan Central Police Station (105 as the center of Busan Central Police Station)’s office on duty, for the same reasons as the preceding paragraph, at around 19:00 on the same day, G transferred the above G to drinking, while a police officer belonging to the F District of the above police station unfolded the Defendant’s armored the Defendant’s lock, she laid down the Defendant’s lock, thereby making the Defendant’

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers related to criminal case processing.

3. From around 19:25 on the same day, the Defendant damaged public goods by: (a) the police officers, such as Hah et al., who were arrested as a current offender at the above police station, expressed a desire to “Chewing few fe.”; (b) the Defendant was using a cell phone screen with one cellular phone monitor at which he had expressed the desire to “sp. f.e.,” and (c) continuously damaged the computer monitor at the same place; and (d) the foregoing office wall at the same place on several occasions at around 21:30 on the same day.