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.

On October 19, 2016, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol in front of the entrance of Daejeon Dong-gu B 101, 3-4, Dong-gu, Daejeon on October 22:17, 2016, and the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with the Defendant’s mother-friendly C and the Defendant’s mother-child c are under the influence of alcohol.

“The” was removed from the slope E by the police officer belonging to the Daejeon Police Station D police station of the Daejeon East Police Station, upon receipt of a report, and “ponner shall go to see to her Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . Habk”, the title of the above E, as a result of a bad handker’s finger, and the “hon gue” grow up.

“Along with the bath theory, as we can see the above E with a bad hand, assaulted the view of the above E once with the hand floor of the hand, with a double hand, such as flabing the bat of the above E with a double hand, and then pushing it behind.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A report on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the act of assaulting the police officer to perform public duties by taking custody of uniform) (the act of assaulting the police officer to perform public duties is deemed to interfere with public duties to be strictly executed, and the crime

In light of the facts that can be seen, under the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, the defendant appeared to have committed the crime of this case, the defendant appears to have committed the crime of this case in a state of detention, the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case in a contingent manner, the defendant has no same criminal record and only one fine before and after the crime of this type, and the fact that the damaged police officer does not want the punishment of the defendant under an agreement with the damaged police officer, etc., the fact that the damaged police officer does not want the punishment of the defendant is favorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means, and consequence, the circumstances before and after the crime of this case, etc., and