A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. Interference with performing public duties;

A. On September 20, 2015, the Defendant returned to the scene after receiving a D’s report that there was a trial expenses due to parking problems, and the police officers belonging to the Bapo Police Station E box called to the site after receiving a report from the Defendant around 21:01 on September 20, 2015, and returned D to the reported person; but, on September 20, 201, the Defendant sent to the police officers “hick person

“A police officer assaulted the police officer, who was frightened by sound, obstructed the patrol vehicle by body, and complied with the police officer’s measures to return home, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of the 112 Report Report, by committing assaulting the police officer, such as taking the F’s chest belonging to the police box, and taking the head of the G assistant belonging to the said police box that continuously restrains the Defendant.

B. On September 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) at a wooden Police Station E (a police box located at H on September 20, 2015; and (b) on the said slope G, the Defendant “I fright to lock.”

“In doing so, the police officers assaulted the police officers to walk the left knee of the above G on one occasion, thereby obstructing the legitimate performance of duties by the police officers on the arrest of flagrant offenders.

2. On September 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) was arrested as a current offender of the crime of interference with the performance of official duties on the part of the Defendant; (b) refused to comply with the police officer’s lower demand, and (c) damaged the said patrol car to the extent that the repair cost was KRW 26,400,00, 26,000, posted on the back of the I Patrol that was a case of a public object.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Each statement of D and F;

1. Written estimate of the damaged vehicle;

1. Photographss of damaged vehicles and photographs of damaged parts;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Article 141 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (the point of impairing goods for public use) of the same Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

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 of the Criminal Act: