A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months and by a fine not exceeding five hundred thousand won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, money is made.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] Cases: Changwon District Court Decision on April 5, 2017: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than eight months and two years of suspended sentence: Supreme Court Decision on April 13, 2017 / [criminal Facts]

1. Violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act;

A. On September 20, 2018, from around 02:34 to 05:30 on September 20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) called “a person who is going to go to go to the general situation room of the Gyeongnam Provincial Police Agency 112 times in total, as shown in the list of crimes (D) using a cell phone (D) in the name of the Defendant; (b) called “a person who is going to go to go to the general situation room of the Gyeongnam Provincial Police Agency 112 times in total; and (c) laid off or cut off the phone without repeatedly or repeatedly speaking.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the duties of the 112 comprehensive situation room employees performing official duties due to the shortage.

B. On September 23, 2018, the Defendant: (a) expressed in the Changbu Police Station E-district of the Changbu Police Station E-gu, Changwon-si; (b) expressed, under the influence of alcohol, that “A police officers working for the police station shall have a desire to see that “I will see that I will see it immediately; and (c) was laid off on their books, and tried to have a computer monitor on their books.”

As a result, the Defendant was able to avoid a disturbance by doing very rough words and actions at a public office for about 20 minutes while under the influence of alcohol.

2. On October 12, 2018, around 04:35, the Defendant: (a) stated that the police officers belonging to the Changwon Police Station E zone, who were dispatched to the Defendant’s repeated 112 report, would be asked about the particulars of the report; (b) stated that “it is not necessary to keep up the value of the crime; and (c) must put the face of G at one time at both end.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of H and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police statement concerning G;

1. Relevant provisions concerning facts constituting an offense;