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

On May 29, 2015, at around 11:00, the Defendant made a telephone call from the victim D (W, 48 years of age) who is a local administrative assistant belonging to the C Viewing Official Gazette, to the effect that “I will not go to South, I would like to go to the examination room,” and the Defendant sought the victim to the C Viewing Official Office in E.

At around 11:20 on the same day, the Defendant assaulted the victim, such as setting up the office equipment and pocketbooks on the floor so far as the victim was able to take a part of the victim by hand, who was engaged in the last correction work of the CM newsletter.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the performance of duties related to the correction work of the correction newsletter of public officials, and at the same time, inflicted injury on the victim, such as dynasium in need of approximately two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A report on the occurrence of a case under injury, report on internal investigation (to photograph photographs of the upper part of the body), investigation report (to submit a medical certificate of injury), and investigation report (to attach a copy of the public official identification card of the victim D);

1. A copy of the public official certificate;

1. A medical certificate of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to one photograph; and

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant reflects his mistake as the primary offender.

The degree of injury of the victim is not severe.

However, the defendant, who is a public official, found the victim's view while working and obstructed the victim's performance of official duties.

The victim was not recovered from damage.

In addition, all kinds of sentencing recorded in the records of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and result of the crime of this case.