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 June 9, 2017, the Defendant: (a) at the 2nd floor office of D local veterans office located in C around June 14:10, 2017, the Defendant: (b) explained the procedures necessary for the selection of a person of distinguished service to the State, the Defendant was unable to avoid a disturbance for one-time time for the Defendant, i.e., “not to keep a person of distinguished service to the State” even though E, who is a public official in charge of the selection of a person of distinguished service to the State.

Therefore, E is indicated as a victim, but it is seen as another registered security guard when considering the witness's testimony, so it is recognized to the extent that the identity of the facts charged is recognized and it does not actually disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right of defense.

The police assigned for special guard requested assistance to the defendant, and the defendant moved to the first floor.

Since then, the defendant was unable to display a stick again from the first floor to the above office, and the victim F (52) who is the police assigned for special guard called "to enter outside the front," but the defendant continued to take a sound out of the front, and the defendant was able to take out the front, and the defendant f (52) f (52) f (the police assigned for special guard) f (the police assigned for special guard) once.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by the victim on the maintenance of the safety and order of the office building, and at the same time, the defendant was inside the right side and the heat requiring medical treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. E statements;

1. The defense counsel asserts that the act of the victim cannot be viewed as a public official subject to interference with the performance of official duties and the act of the victim's raising the defendant does not constitute legitimate performance of official duties.

First of all, the term "public official" in the Criminal Code is a person engaged in the affairs of the state or local government and public corporations equivalent thereto, and the contents of his labor are not limited to mechanical physical.