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

Around 00:35 on April 27, 2015, the Defendant was arrested as an offender in the act of committing an act of committing an offense by taking a desire to a police officer who took a part in drinking in a fountain B, who took a part in the squad at the same time, and was arrested on April 27, 2015. The Defendant was unable to close the door of the patrol car to stop the front slope E belonging to the same earth unit and start the patrol car to leave B continuously in the front of the slope E belonging to the same earth unit, and was unable to start the patrol car by inserting the arms in the open cre of the steering window.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression, and investigation of the above D and E crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. E statements;

1. Investigation report (a copy of arrest report of a suspect against B);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to a photograph by cutting off on-site video images;

1. Relevant provisions of criminal facts: Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Commercial concurrence and choice of punishment: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution: It is so decided as per Disposition by the reason of Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act or more;

The reason for sentencing (out the range of the sentencing guidelines) type 1 of obstruction of the performance of official duties, basic area: The extent of violence and intimidation in June-1 and April, if there are many public officials who suffer damage: The fact that there is no previous conviction or more than the suspension of execution.