A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 21, 2016, the Defendant: (a) on the ground that the Victim C does not drink in the D main shop operated by the Victim C in Busan, Daegu, Busan, Daegu, on April 21, 2016; (b) whether the Defendant would not drink the Victim;

A. The victim’s main business operation was interfered with by force, such as making it impossible for customers who had entered the said store by avoiding a disturbance between about 30 minutes, such as hacking walk and walk walk walk walk walk walk.

2. The Defendant’s insult, on April 22, 2016, at around 00:20, at the same place as the foregoing paragraph 1, and received a report at the same time as the foregoing paragraph 1, and called out to the Busan Coast Guard E District Police Station, “The president does not sell alcoholic beverages to the president.”

Hanife Habife

From the fact that there are many unspecified customers of the above main point, “the victim openly insultd the victim by referring the victim to the large interest of “the string of weather, the string of weather, etc., ...............”

3. On April 22, 2016, at around 00:25, the Defendant: (a) sent out after receiving a report of 112 that the Defendant interfered with drinking business outside of the above D main shop; (b) obstructed the Defendant’s behavior by demanding the Defendant to stop the disturbance from the head of the police station of the Busan Coast Guard Police Station E zone; (c) took a bath to the said F; and (d) continuously walking on the right bridge; and (d) was arrested by the police officer as the current offender under suspicion of interference with duties and insult, etc., he laid down the parts of the F on the floor and walked the front side and the left side side side of the said F with the escape of the said F; and (d) went back to the patrol zone after having arrived at the patrol zone; and (e) again, the Defendant committed an assault, etc. of the said F through the use of the f.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the dispatch and treatment of 112 report by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the respective police statement legislation to F and C 1.