A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

around 18:20 on August 5, 2014, the Defendant reported to the effect that “C” located in Pyeongtaek-si B of Gyeonggi-do, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties on the protection, etc. of the people’s property, by taking into consideration the face of the above E on one occasion, while requesting a police officer to produce identification cards from the police officer of Pyeongtaek-gu Police Station, who called out after receiving a report that “the Defendant is drinking an excessive person without calculating his/her income.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of F’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act requires strict diversification because it undermines the authority of the public authority and disturbs the establishment of legal order. However, the defendant seems to have recognized the facts charged of this case, there is no particular penalty power, the defendant seems to have committed contingent crimes under the influence of alcohol, and other circumstances shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, family environment, etc., are considered within the scope of the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines [the obstruction of performance of official duties, the obstruction of performance of official duties (where the degree of violence is minor), the mitigation area (one month to eight months of imprisonment).]