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

On May 9, 2015, at around 00:25, the Defendant asked questions as to whether it was difficult for the police officers of the C District Police Station D and police officers of the C District sent out after receiving a report from 112 that it might be caused by domestic violence at the residence located in the Geum-gu, Busan, Singu, and on the ground of Madson, “I am Dok, I am Dok, I am Dok, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am back, I am am back, I am back, I am am back, I am am the back of the police uniforms.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of official duties concerning the maintenance of police officers E and D.

Around 12:55 on May 9, 2015, the following: (a) D and C were arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender for the obstruction of performance of official duties; and (b) the Defendant used the Defendant as a flagrant offender for the obstruction of performance of official duties; (c) the Defendant sent the Defendant to B as a detention house; and (d) the Defendant assaulted the Defendant at one time to the right drinking of the head of the police station, namely, “I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, and I am.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of official duties concerning the maintenance of police officers E's order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

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

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

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (6 to 1 year and 4 months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (6 to 1 year and 4 months). [Pronouncement Decision] The crime of this case is that the defendant assaults police officers to obstruct the performance of official duties, thereby obstructing the quality of the crime.

However, it is against the defendant, there is no criminal record of the same kind and suspension of execution or any other crime of this case.