A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Criminal facts

On July 3, 2016, at around 15:10, the Defendant: (a) completed the c apartment 402 of Mayang-si around 15:10, and performed drinking as well as the her relatives, and (b) was under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant: (c) went to the entrance of the apartment entrance in order to verify the details of the report by the police officer affiliated with the Stackyang-gu Police Station E box called out upon receipt of the 112 report; (d) carried out the entrance inside the entrance from the gate or apartment stairs; and (e) the said F entered the Defendant “on the road.”

쇠도요

As seen in “, I am I am saw to the above F that “I am saw that I am feas, sway feas, I am to am, I am to am, I am to am, I am to am on the road, I am to am to am. I am to am. I am to am. I am to am. I am to am. I am at the right side of the above F at one time with the floor of the hand, and am to the right side of the drinking.”

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Each statement of D and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report on attachment, etc. of photographs of damaged parts, and a report on internal investigation (Attachment to the 112 Report List);

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the reasons for sentencing of sentence of imprisonment with prison labor, and the reasons therefor;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to five years; and

2. Application of the sentencing criteria [the types of decisions] The basic area [the scope of the recommended punishment] shall be sentenced to six months to one year and four months, which impedes the performance of official duties in the course of interfering with the execution of official duties. (Interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of duties]

3. In full view of the following: (a) the degree of interference with the decision-making of sentence; (b) the period of suspension of the execution of official duties due to the obstruction of the execution of official duties; (c) the Defendant did not know even during the period of suspension of execution; and (d) the Defendant, as well as the Defendant, who committed a crime involving obstruction of the performance of official duties or damage to public goods, has a lot of experience in punishing the Defendant due to a