A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 14, 2016, from around 18:00 to 20:00, the Defendant: (a) expressed a large voice without any justifiable reason to the victim F (F) who was an employee of Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul at “E convenience store” located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul; (b) provided the victim with a large voice, without any justifiable reason, with a view to doing so; (c)

E. Does they have suffered the same quality of E.I.;

Sners whether male goes to a lender or not.

“Along with sound, he/she had committed an act that seems to have been placed on the face of the victim with a drinking cans, and interfered with the management of convenience points of the said victim by force for about two hours, such as attaching the convenience store entrance.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, on September 14, 2016, 200 around 20:00, on the way ahead of the convenience points specified in paragraph 1, and “the head of a household gets a pedal.”

“Around 112, the Seoul Yongpo Police Station G police box sent out after receiving a 112 report, to have the words “to return home from a slope H to the house,” and then to use the H’s breath, and then to brea off the floor.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to 112 report processing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement with F and H (including I statements);

1. A written statement prepared by J and K;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the choice of imprisonment for each crime;

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 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is under the influence of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act, and thus, the Defendant’s liability is not weak, such as: (a) obscing the convenience store employees unable to enter the facility; and (b) obstructing the performance of their duties; and

However, there is no emphasis on the degree of the use of violence against the obstruction of the performance of official duties, it is agreed with the victim F of the obstruction of duties, and others.