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

On May 31, 2015, at around 00:35, the Defendant: (a) received a 112 report that a under the influence of alcohol was used at a place; and (b) received a request for returning home from E in the circumstances where he belongs to the D Zone Zone of the Manj Police Station, which was called to the site; (c) conducted a test without any justifiable reason; and (d) assaulted the Defendant, by hand, at the time of her sonm of E and her left arms.

As above, the Defendant interfered with police officers’ legitimate execution of their duties regarding the prevention, suppression, and investigation of crimes, and carried out left posts to which the number of days of treatment cannot be known to the victim E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of E prepared by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of victims;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da1448, Feb. 1, 201)

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;