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

피고인은 2015. 5. 19. 21:05경 충남 예산군 B에 있는 예산경찰서 C지구대 사무실에 술에 취한 채 찾아 와 교통사고처리특례법위반죄 등으로 현행범인 체포되어 위 사무실에 인치 중인 피고인의 선배 D을 지칭하며 “우리형님이 뭘 잘못했다고 수갑을 채우고 있냐”라고 큰 소리로 말하면서 위 D을 데리고 나가려 하였다.

As the reduced E, Inspector F, and horse scambling G et al. who observed the above defendant's behavior were asked to restrain the victim and get out of the office, the horse g referred to as "I ambling G," and the horse g "I ambling G's right side side of the horse g with the left hand part of the horse g at one time, and the chest part of the reduced E who continuously flowed the defendant by hand was out of the above office by F and F and G, which led to a correction of about 20 minutes outside of the above office.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties of police officers regarding traffic accident management affairs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to G and E;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation and Social Service Order [Scope of Recommendation] There is no person who has a basic area (6 months to 1 year and 4 months) [decision of sentence] 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, the Defendant’s violation of and confessions against the Defendant, 2 years of suspended sentence, the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., and all the conditions of the sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, including the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as above, comprehensively taking into account the following factors.