However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On October 16, 2019, the Defendant: (a) requested a driver to leave the above D's bridge at a vehicle to verify the circumstances of the accident, including D's circumstances belonging to the Asan Police Station C's vehicle, dispatched to the site after receiving a report on 112 days from the shocking of the parked vehicle in the vehicle behind Asan City, B at the end of Busan City, on October 16, 2019; and (b) requested a policeman to leave the vehicle to check the circumstances of the accident; (c) "I will see why I would know why I would she have to know how I would she know, I will she will she have to walk the bridge at several times while I would she was seated with the driver's seat; and (d) tried to get the above E's face one time, such as the front she was a mountain stick, and she was in the front her body part, and carried with the above 38 D's gun with another hand.

As above, the Defendant interfered with a police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the processing of 112 Report, etc., and at the same time, the Defendant inflicted damage on the left-hand pipe play in need of approximately two weeks of treatment on the victim D (ma, 50 years of age), E (ma, 37 years of age), and on the victim E (ma, 37 years of age), respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Each statement of opinion;

1. On-site photographs and video CD victims argued that there was no intention to obstruct the performance of official duties since they thought that the driver who was at the expense of the defendant and the one who was at the expense of the defendant, and that there was no intention to obstruct the performance of official duties. However, each of the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, namely, the police officers suffered from the police uniform and possessed an electric power, a gun, a lock, etc., and thus could have been sufficiently recognized as police officers. The defendant refused the second demand despite being notified that he could be arrested as a obstruction of the performance of official duties, and exercised violence continuously and the victim police officers