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

At around 17:10 on February 23, 2015, the Defendant expressed the Defendant’s desire to read “Nek one knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife.”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The sentencing range recommended according to the sentencing criteria: The scope of sentence [decision of type] that the obstruction of the performance of official duties or the coercion of official duties (a person who has been specially punished] (the scope of recommending punishment] shall be from six months to one year and four months;

2. Although the criminal liability of the defendant is not minor in light of the fact that the defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had the same or similar criminal history, and the extent of the assault of this case is considerable, the defendant's punishment is determined as ordered in consideration of the fact that the defendant reflects the instant crime, the defendant has no criminal history other than the fine, and other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, etc.