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

On October 25, 2014, at around 05:30 on the street of Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Defendant expressed that “I would like to go to the police officer of the Incheon Training Police Station D Zone D, which called “I would like to go to the bit of bit of bit of bit of the police officer of the Republic of Korea,” and “I would like to go to the police officer at the same bit of bit of bit of bit of the police officer of the Republic of Korea, and I would like to go to the police officer.”

계속해서 피고인은 이를 지켜보던 F을 폭행하여 위 E으로부터 이를 제지당하자 발로 위 E의 좌측 정강이 부위를 1회 걷어차고, 좌측 무릎 부위를 1회 걷어찼다.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to police statements made to F and E;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the "justifiable circumstances") of the suspended sentence;

1. The scope of the sentencing guidelines for recommendation [the scope of the sentencing guidelines] the basic area (six months to one year and four months) of the obstruction of the performance of official duties (the obstruction of the performance of official duties) (the scope of the sentencing guidelines];

2. Determination of sentence shall be made in the same manner as the order is based on the fact that the defendant made a confession of and reflects against the crime of this case as the initial offender, the degree of damage by police officers is not serious, the age, character and conduct, environment of the defendant, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, etc.