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

[Criminal Power] On April 18, 2014, the Defendant is a person who has been notified of a summary order of a fine of 500,000 won by committing a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault) at the Incheon District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

1. From around 02:00 on December 17, 2014, the Defendant interfered with business: (a) at the Esing point of the victim D’s operation in Pyeongtaek-si; (b) the victim, who received a request for the issuance of Arabic C, attempted to cancel the card that he/she has settled, but the cancellation of the card was delayed due to an error in the operation of the device; (c) the victim’s cancellation of the card was delayed; (d) the victim’s cancellation of the card was due to an error in the operation of the device; (e) how the card was immediately cancelled; (e) how to calculate the card; and (e) how to calculate the card when he/she was informed of the cancellation; and (e) the victim’s wrong music; (e) the victim’s withdrawal request did not go at the above main point; and (e) interfered with the victim’s singing service by force for about 45 minutes. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official business.

“A” in the course of ascertaining the circumstances of the case from the foregoing D, G, the superintendent of the F District of the Pyeongtaek-gu Police Station, called the F District, called “Ch”, “Ch”, “G, who heard the phrase that the said G would not take a bath,” and “G, as it appears to be inside the news, such as Cracker, her age level, her hand, her hand, and her hand, expressed a desire to read “Chack,” and “Chak,” the chest of G, the chest of which was sent to the upper end of the back of the work clothes, was sealed, her hand, her hand, her hand, her hand, was removed, and she tried to remove the rank attached to G’s left shoulder.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers concerning patrol duty 112.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. A statement of H and I;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: 1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of one copy of criminal records and summary order;