Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 4, 2015, the Defendants, who are part of the interference with business, were able to take a large voice from the “E main store” operated by the victim D in South-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul at port on the ground that they demand the victim to be able to harm the victim’s early use, and Defendant B was able to take a warning that Defendant B would not be able to engage in a schosome funeral, and Defendant A was able to take a door to the victim, and Defendant A was able to avoid the disturbance, such as “I see my mind that I would see my mind,” and Defendant A was able to take the victim’s voice.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly interfered with the bar business operated by the victim by force for about 10 minutes.

2. 공무집행방해 피고인들은 2015. 6. 4. 22:37경 제1항 기재 장소에서 신고를 받고 출동한 F파출소 경위 G이 인적사항을 물어보자 밝히길 거부하고 피고인 B은 상의를 탈의한 채 G에게 돌진하여 손으로 가슴 부위를 밀치고 주먹을 휘두르고, 피고인 A도 합세하여 “내가 너 모가지 안따면 사람이 아니다”라고 말하며 G에게 주먹을 휘두르고 현행범으로 체포된 후 순찰차에 타던 중 오른발로 G 가슴을 발로 1회 찼다.

As a result, the Defendants jointly interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties conducted by police officers on 112 reporting processing work.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police officer's statement about D, H and G;

1. A copy of the service log of the F police box; and

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant Articles 314 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and Articles 136 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; and Articles 136 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of each Criminal Act shall apply mutatis mutandis;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence: The Defendants were jointly called to commit the crime of interference with business.