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

On November 23, 2015, at around 00:27, the Defendant recommended the Defendant to return home to the police box at the expense of the drinking value by a policeman affiliated with the Busan Yeongdeungpo-do Police Station C police box, who was working for a situation at the Busan Young-do Police Station C police box located in B, Busan, the Defendant only fell back and die.

Chewingly, the victim’s head was 1 time after the victim’s back to the victim’s end.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the situation service within the police box.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to E and D;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (the result of CCTV extraction and analysis at the time of crime);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., the violation of crimes, the absence of the same criminal record, and the absence of the record of criminal punishment exceeding fines) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [Determination] where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme of mitigation elements is minor [where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor] [the scope of the recommended sentence] applicable in the mitigation area] from January to August / [the scope of the recommended sentence] applicable in the mitigation area] from January to August / [the scope of the punishment] statutory penalty under Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act: From January to 5 [decision of sentence] 6 months] and from suspension of execution two years;