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 November 6, 2016, the Defendant took a bath to a person who is under the influence of alcohol in front of Macheon-si, B, 2016, and was urged by D to return home from a police officer affiliated with C District of the Macheon Police Station C, who was dispatched after receiving a report of 112, and was urged by D to return home from the police officer affiliated with C District of the Macheon Police Station, the Defendant committed assault, such as selling the chest part of the above D.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the maintenance of public peace and order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement in each police statement made to D or E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to entries in the report processing case list; and

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. [the scope of applicable sentences under the law] 5 years of imprisonment [the scope of applicable sentences] / [the scope of recommended sentences] fundamental area: From June to April 1 (the ruling of sentenced punishment] from June to June 1 (the ruling of sentenced punishment) the act of assaulting the police in uniform 2 years of suspended sentence should be punished strictly. Thus, the defendant is selected to be sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor.

However, the execution of punishment shall be suspended in consideration of the fact that the act of assault by the defendant was not serious, that the defendant led to the confession of the crime, that the defendant is against himself, and that he does not have the same criminal record.

However, in consideration of the fact that the defendant committed the crime in this case under the influence of alcohol even though he/she received a summary order of a fine of three million won on October 5, 2015 due to the criminal facts that he/she driven on June 30, 2015, he/she again committed the crime in the state of alcohol, he/she shall order the defendant to provide community service.