A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 15:00 on February 14, 2017, the Defendant, who interfered with his duties, was under mixed drinking on the ground that the Defendant’s mother’s parent was judged to have been infected by dementia at around that time, and was under drinking, and was under drinking so that, without any special reason, the Defendant was unable to have avoided the Defendant’s disturbance for three hours at around three hours.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the operation of the above victim's restaurant by force.

2. At the time and place specified in paragraph 1, the Defendant took a bath to the victim C, “patently, fluent, and fluor,” while his/her employees and other customers are heard.

Accordingly, the defendant openly insulting the above victim.

3. The Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, at the time and place specified in Paragraph 1, and 112 reported by the Defendant that the Defendant committed the same crime as specified in Paragraphs 1 and 2, and committed assault by the Defendant, on the ground that the slope E, a police officer belonging to the Seoul Hyung Police Station D police box, called “spatch fe and feat,” sent to the said police officer, took a bath to the Defendant, and boomed him by hand, and took the flaps, and booms the chest.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention of crimes by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol against C and E;

1. Written statements of C, F and G;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant legal provisions 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), Article 311 of the Criminal Act (the point of insult) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor 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. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution: The instant crime committed by the Defendant interfered with and insulting the Defendant’s duty, and without any reason, assaulting the police officer on official duty.