Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

Provided, That each of the above punishments shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 22, 2015, Defendant A, at around 00:40, 00 a.m., f., f., a police officer of the Eastern Police Station E zone, who was called for after having received a report on his drinking price issues, was sent to F on the ground that the F.m., a police officer of the East Police Station E zone E zone of the same police station, was f.m. and f. was f.b. to return home, and Defendant A f., on one occasion, performed the part of F.m. on the following grounds: “F. 5 police officers, who were f.m., who were f. at the drinking house, were f.m., to be f.,

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the dispatch duty of the police officer 112 report.

2. Defendant B

A. On the same day, at around 00:45 on the same day as Paragraph 1, the Defendant: (a) prevented the police officers belonging to the said patrol zone from getting aboard A on the grounds that A was arrested as a flagrant offender; (b) obstructed the police officers assigned to the said patrol zone from getting aboard A; and (c) when G security guards shot back him, the police officers took the bath that “I sprink spack, spack, spack spack spacks, spacks him, spacks him, sprinks him, and splates him on the floor.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of the police officer in the crime and the dispatch of the report 112.

나. 피고인은 같은 날 01:45경 현행범 체포되어 인치된 부산 동래구 H에 있는 E지구대에서 술에 취하여 지구대 밖으로 나가려고 하였고, 이를 제지하려던 위 지구대 소속 경찰관인 I에게 “개새끼야 씨발새끼들아, 호로새끼야, 전라도깽깽이들 같은 새끼들아”라고 욕설을 하였으며, 이어 지구대에 와 있던 사람들에게 시비를 걸고, 위 I이 이를 제지하면서 수갑을 사용하려 하자 발로 I의 허벅지를 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the above defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the protection of suspects, prevention of crimes, management of terrestrial groups, etc. of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. The application of each police protocol to F, G, I, and J 1.