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

On April 21, 2018, the Defendant is growing on the way to a male, in front of B at Silung-si around 05:00.

Neither delivery nor delivery flab, nor delivery flab.

In order to be asked of questions about the fact of Otobane from D, a police officer belonging to the Singu Police Station C District of the Singuing Police Station, who was reported 112, “I amb off”, and amb off the above D’s left side blick with the floor of hand, and assaulted the blick E’s right-hand click with the light of the blick E belonging to the said blick.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or E;

1. A witness's written statement, a photograph of a victimized police officer, or a log to work in the C District;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to the police;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. In light of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, the circumstances leading up to the crime, and the Defendant’s violent force, etc., it seems that the degree of assault is relatively significant.

It does not seem to have the same criminal history, and the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the reflective circumstances.