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.

1. On July 11, 2018, around 23:55, the Defendant damaged the front door owned by the victim by walking the front door of the front door in which the victim C resides, by misunderstanding the front door of the front door of the house, under the influence of alcohol, and by walking the front door of the front door of the building in which the victim C resides.

2. On July 12, 2018, around 00:04, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, and around 00:04, the Defendant 104-dong apartment house B in Gwangju North-gu, Gwangju, and the like apartment house 104-dong, “ 104-dong apartment house,” she was urged to refrain from the Defendant’s behavior from the E affiliated with the D District Unit of the Police Station of the Gwangju Northern Police Station called out upon receipt of the 112 report, and demanded the Defendant to return home, and she was able to take the face of E in his/her hand, “this, she h.e., h., drinking son., h., h.).”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement of C and F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes related to CCTV images of elevators, the criminal scene of which is exposed;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for each crime;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. A decision to suspend the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, taking into account the following: (a) although the nature of the crime is inferior in light of the crime committed for the reason of sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act with an order to observe and observe the protection, it is an contingent crime committed while drinking and drinking alcohol exceeding the prime amount in the workplace ceremony; (b) there is an agreement with the victim of the crime of property damage; (c) husband and wife and wife of the first degree disability who live with the victim of the crime of property damage; and (d) there is no other criminal record in addition to the one-time fine.