A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 21, 2014, at around 00:50, the Defendant interfered with the Defendant’s business, by force, interfered with the victim’s operation of the “D” operated by the victim C in Daegu Seo-gu, Daegu-gu, by means of force, such as: (a) making the victim feel, taking a bath, and having the victim take money for calculating the value of tobacco and raising money; (b) making the victim resist; and (c) making the 10-minutes, such as making the 10-minutes, such as making the strings, and making the strings available

2. The Defendant took a bath on the ground that police officers of the Daegu Western Police Station E District Unit of the Police Station, who was called upon the above C’s report, use the Defendant’s horse and returned home, and committed a disturbance to the police officer, such as, at the same time, at the same time and place as, paragraph (1) of the same Article, the Defendant avoided the disturbance of the police officer, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties for the maintenance of public order, etc., by putting the police officer under patrol while carrying out other patrols to “a boom to the police station” and booming the police officer at the same time and place.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police statement made to F and C;

1. Application of statutes governing the place of work;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is committed with the reason of sentencing, which prevents the defendant from running his business, and uses violence against the police officer performing official duties. However, the crime of this case is committed without any reason, and the defendant is led to a confession of and in depth against the defendant, the degree of the crime of this case is relatively minor, and the victim of this case is not punished against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim of obstruction of business, and the crime of this case exceeds the criminal history and fine of the same kind.