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.

On November 13, 2017, the Defendant did not include the detailed details of the receipt in C, which is located in B, Namnam-si around November 13, 2017.

Along with the fact that he was reported to his employees, etc. by 112, he was sent back to the subordinate slope E belonging to the Nannan Police Station D District E, and the chest part of the above E was pushed back once.

The Defendant continued to have her home home from the above E outside of the above C, and she expressed her desire to “Pulely frankly frankly,” and her breast part was tightly pushed by hand.

As a result, the defendant assaulted police officers to interfere with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention of crimes by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. To inform the department related to the report of 112 case, to the department related to the report of 112 case, and to the application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the investigation report (

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on community service and lecture attendance order;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment on the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (no person in special sentencing) shall interfere with the performance of public duties;

2. Determination of sentence [the Prosecutor’s Opinion] 1 year of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence / [Judgment] 4 months of imprisonment, and 1 year of suspended sentence is a serious crime that undermines the function of the State by nullifying legitimate exercise of public authority, and thus requires strict punishment.

However, considering the favorable circumstances, such as the defendant's confession, and the fact that there is no record of the crime exceeding the fine, etc., the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the defendant exceeded the lower limit of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, by comprehensively taking account of various sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act as shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment