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

On April 5, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around D convenience stores located in Pyeongtaek-si C on April 19:15, 2018, and (b) around D convenience stores, the Defendant saw a man who drunk and frighted with a fluence.

“A police officer, who received a report of 112, requested F to return home from the Defendant, was able to ask F to the Defendant, who was on board the patrol vehicle with the mind of the patrol vehicle while taking a bath, and assaulted F’s chest with the hand hand by assaulting F’s chest with the hand hand, thereby hindering police officers from performing their legitimate duties concerning the handling of reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the defendant's age, occupation, sex, family relationship, and circumstances before and after the crime, under the grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances:

- The nature of the crime of this case does not correspond to those of the defendant, provided that there is no history that the defendant has been subject to other criminal punishment exceeding the fine for the last ten years. - The defendant is against his mistake.