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

1. On March 13, 2018, the Defendant: (a) received a request to return home for 15 minutes from the police officers belonging to the police box affiliated with the said police box; (b) took a part of the left part of the slope E ( South, 44 years old); and (c) took a back the back part of the back part of the back part of the F (T, 25 years old) with the left part of the back part of the back part of the police box belonging to the said police box one time, and took part of the back part of the back part of the said F (T, 25 years old) with the left part, and took part of the back part of the back part of the said F with the left part at two times.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the prevention, suppression, and investigation of crimes.

2. On March 13, 2018, around 22:57, the Defendant, who damaged public goods, was arrested in flagrante and was on board the back seat of 112 patrols (G) with interference with the performance of official duties, such as the foregoing paragraph (1), thereby impairing the repair cost of 343,750 won, by walking the back door of the patrol patrols at hand, thereby damaging the patrol vehicles, which are public goods, so that the repair cost of 343,750 won can be avoided.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and E;

1. A written statement prepared by H;

1. Written estimate of general repair expenses;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the spot and damaged photographs;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Article 141 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (the point of impairing goods for public use) of the same Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of ordinary concurrent crimes (limited to cases where a person interferes with the execution of each official duty);

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

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. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) A crime of damaging public property [the scope of recommendations] A type of public property invalidation and destruction (Invalidity of public property) and the basic area (from June to one year and six months) (a person with no special sentencing factors)

(b) Sentencing is not applicable because each interference with the execution of official duties by obstructing the performance of official duties is in a mutually competitive relationship.

(c)

The scope of punishment according to the standards for handling multiple crimes shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than six months (the sentencing criteria shall be set.