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

On December 20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) 23:35, 2018, she was accommodated in the Babel C located in Ansan-si, but she got the disturbance, and (b) she was reported to 112, she she also sheed the victim E, a police officer belonging to the police station D District Unit of the police station, and she she sheed the victim’s body to make it true, and she sprinked her her flap with her hand during the 200s.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers related to the 112 Report Processing, and at the same time, he saw the victim as a scarke wall in need of treatment for two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Two copies of a medical certificate;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing damaged police officers' damaged photographs, bag-spag photographs, bag-spags;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act was determined by comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant did not have any criminal record other than the criminal record of a fine imposed in 1999; (b) the degree of the victim’s injury; (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime were committed.