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

At around 04:40 on June 13, 2015, the Defendant assaulted B before “a somewhat unspecified,” located in Asan-si, a male-ro, Asan-si, 198. On the 112 Report, the Defendant sent the Defendant to B with a slope D affiliated with the 112 police box of the Asan-si Police Station C, who was called out after receiving the 112 report, expressed his/her bath to “efabbbbs.” As a consequence, the Defendant assaulted D’s right-hand direction to walk once.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of the patrol log 112;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [the scope of the recommended sentence] The grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of the recommended sentence] shall be taken into account: (a) the mitigation area (one month to eight months); (b) the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor; (c) the degree of damage is minor; (d) the degree of damage is minor; and (e) the degree of violation and deceptive scheme is minor;