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

1. Around 00:50 on November 6, 2015, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with approximately 0.160% of alcohol concentration in blood in the section of about 10km from the 10km to the cage of cage at the cage of a cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage.

2. On November 6, 2015, at around 01:40, the Defendant: (a) was subject to the control of drinking from the police officers belonging to the police station C District in the Heung Police Station C District; (b) the Defendant refused to comply with the control; and (c) the Defendant’s failure to comply with the control of drinking from the police officers belonging to the police officers belonging to the Heung Police Station C District; and (d) the Defendant reported the assault in this case; and (c) the Defendant reported the same.

‘Before doing so, 'Written Ba', the chest of D, the police officer, who was preparing control documents, etc. at the same time, was pushed down with both hands and was drinking once.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duty of dispatch of report 112 and control of drinking driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Report on the circumstances of a driver making a drinking, notification of the results of crackdown on drinking driving, inquiry of the results of crackdown on drinking, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report the circumstances of driving a drinking;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of drinking, the choice of imprisonment, etc.) concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of public duties and the choice of imprisonment, etc.);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing as set forth below) reflects the Defendant’s wrong recognition of his/her misconduct, and the fact that the Defendant agreed with the police officer, who is the counter-party to the obstruction of the performance of official duties, as well as the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.