A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four 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

1. On October 24, 2016, at the Daegu-si Office D branch office of the Daegu-si Bank D, which is managed by the victim C in Seo-gu, Daegu-si, Daegu-si, on October 24, 2016, the Defendant damaged the wall by putting the Defendant’s credit card and cash out of the wall, on the ground that the Defendant’s employees, who were saved from the cash withdrawal machine, did not promptly appear at the cash withdrawal machine, and the Defendant’s credit card and cash was 31,900 won of the market price installed therein.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the above bank around 21:20 on the same day, and the Defendant expressed that the Defendant F in the circumstances belonging to the Daegu Western Police Station Ear District, Daegu, which called “I would like to do so in any way to the Defendant” on the grounds that “I would like to do so, and police swe will also be equal.”

Before doing a bath theory, the above background F was assaulted by assaulting F, i.e., f., f., f., f., f., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g.,

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the police officer's legitimate 112 reporting handling of the case.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F, G, and C;

1. The place where he works in the E District;

1. Photographs and CCTV photographs;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 366 and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of hindering the performance of official duties and the choice of imprisonment), which govern the criminal facts, and the choice of punishment (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties and the choice of imprisonment);

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (the fact that shows the attitude of recognizing and opposing mistakes, the fact that there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, the victim of damage to property expresses his/her intention not to punish him/her, the degree of interference with the execution of official duties