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

1. On March 12, 2015, at around 21:00, the Defendant: (a) found the “Dcafeteria” operated by the victim C (n, 63 years of age) in the cafeteria B apartment commercial building; (b) found the breath in the state of being drunk; and (c) she expressed the victim the victim’s breath by the large voice, “I will not bat the bat of this house, I will not bat the bat of this house; bat the bat of this bat; and cat the bat of this bat at this bat; and (d) interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force for about 20 minutes, such as: (a) the victim bats the Defendant and other customers who were in the said bat at the cat at the cat

2. When the Defendant, at the time, at the place, and at the place of the performance of official duties set forth in paragraph (1), and at the site upon receiving a report of 112 due to the Defendant’s act set forth in paragraph (1), expressed a bath to the effect that the Defendant would take away from the commercial building and return home, and that the Defendant “this spons the police sponsor of this sponsor,” and assaulted the Defendant at the right right end of the above sponsor.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reported cases by F. F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to F and C;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. The choice of applicable legal provisions and the choice of punishment for the crime to be punished under Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing performance of official duties)

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act on probation and community service order is the favorable sentencing factor, such as the fact that the defendant acknowledged the crime and reflects the fact that the defendant agreed with the victim with the obstruction of business, and the fact that the defendant has multiple criminal records of violence or obstruction of performance of official duties

These factors of sentencing are various.