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

On June 27, 2015, at around 23:11, the Defendant: (a) asked whether or not a policeman affiliated with the Kimpo Police Station Dox, who was called out after having received 112 a report, had a intent to pay for the drinking value; (b) asked him/her whether or not he/she was “I am am son, I am son, I am son, I am bling E head, and then arrested a flagrant offender under suspicion of obstruction of performance of performance of duties, and used him/her to take the right-hand part of E, as his/her head.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding F;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each statement of G and H;

1. Service log for a police box and service log for 112 reported cases;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of a photographs of damaged parts;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (see, e.g., Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., that the defendant reflects his/her mistake and that