A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 5, 2017, at the C convenience store located in Gwangju City around 03:20, the Defendant: (a) asked the Defendant to disclose personal information from the police officer of the Gyeonggi Police Station E box affiliated with the Gyeonggi Police Station, a police officer of the Gyeonggi Police Station, who was called to the scene after receiving the notification of 112 from the Defendant that the Defendant would not pay the taxi fee; and (b) sent the victim out of the entrance to the Defendant, who was asked for the payment of the taxi fee from the victim who was able to receive the demand for the payment of the taxi fee from the victim who was able to receive the notification of 112 of the 110 taxi engineer D, who was the police officer belonging to the Gyeonggi Police Station, and the said D and convenience store employees G., who was able to keep the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim and interfered with the police officer's legitimate execution of duties concerning 112 reporting processing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Each statement of D and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to CCTV images and photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of public duties), Article 311 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, even though the Defendant was punished for obstructing the performance of official duties in 2015, in addition, in light of the fact that the Defendant takes a bath to a police officer who is performing legitimate official duties and obstructed the performance of official duties, the nature of the crime is hot.

However, the court shall comprehensively consider the following factors, such as the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, the fact that there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine, and the age, environment, sexual conduct, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and determine the punishment as shown in the order.