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

At around 19:10 on July 17, 2016, the Defendant interfered with the investigation by saying, without any justifiable reason, that “C” in front of the case of property damage and damage on the road located in Sungnam-si, the Sinnam-si, the Sinnam-si, and the police officer E and F, of the Sungnam Police Station D (a police box of the Sungnam Police Station) dispatched after receiving 112 reports on the damage and damage of property on the road of “C” located in the Sinnam-si, the Defendant interfered with the said police officer’s investigation by stating, “I fright,

Then, the Defendant completed the process of filing a report case, and completed the patrol vehicle, and the above police officers who want to take aboard the patrol vehicle “I see as soon as possible, walked the above F F’s mouth one time by sound, and took the face part of the E at one time by drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the handling of reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of the victims, and a witness's statement;

1. Each photograph, CD;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (in consideration of the fact that he/she commits an error and has no record of punishment for the same kind of violent crime, etc.);

1. It shall be decided as per Disposition for the reason of probation, community service, or lecture attendance order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act or more;