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

On February 17, 2018, at the parking lot before the police box located in Suwon-si C, Suwon-si, the Defendant: (a) reported that the Defendant does not pay a taxi fee; and (b) called the victim E (29 years old) who was a policeman belonging to the said police box to the scene; and (c) paid a fare to the Defendant; and (d) paid a fee to the victim of the defect who suffered from the defect that he returned to the scene.

It is whether there is a delivery within the meaning of this Article.

Before being able to see “the victim’s left part of the body of the victim’s drinking,” etc., the victim took one time at the left part of the body.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties regarding the suppression of police officers' crimes, and at the same time, injured the victim, such as gambling cases requiring approximately two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. 112 A list of reported cases;

1. An investigation report (the head of the closure of on-site CCTV images);

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the head of a cover of a safaf and CCTV saf;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (Punishments imposed on the crimes of serious injury);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Act on the Protection and Observation, etc. of Community Service Order and Order to Attend Military Service, Article 59 of the Criminal Act, and Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc., committed the instant crime again even though the Defendant had the opportunity to wear his violent inclinations and abnormal behavior at the time of drinking was sufficient, which led to the instant crime. The Defendant assaulted the victim who was in the front of the police station before the police station, who was given the right to take a cab and return home, thereby impairing the public authority with regard to the enforcement of the Act.

Even though the defendant was in the vicinity of the victim's own eye, the victim's suffering was reasonable, and the victim was actually receiving medical treatment.