A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Around 23:50 on June 8, 2016, the Defendant: (a) received 112 report that “Negngngngngngngngngngnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements concerning E and G;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., taking into account favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing) is that the instant crime uses violence against police officers dispatched after receiving a report, and the nature of such crime is disadvantageous.

However, it is advantageous to the fact that the defendant recognizes the facts charged and seriously reflects the facts charged, and that the defendant does not have any criminal records exceeding the previous facts and fines.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, means and results of crimes, and the circumstances after crimes shall be determined as ordered by taking into account various sentencing conditions shown in the trial process of this case.

[Sentencing Criteria - Multiple Offenses: the Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties, the Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties, and Type 1 (Obstruction of Performance of Duties)