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

1. Around 05:00 on December 7, 2018, the Defendant: (a) sent a taxi driver to the said police box, and visited him to the said police box, and (b) sent him her to be paid a taxi fee and returned to her; and (c) sent her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her; (b) during the course of his her her fluencing, etc., he she sent her to her “Y, this son, this son,” and “boom,” and (c) sent her home to her for the reason that he she would be able to her to her to her face-tour in the front of the said police box, and that he she would use her home to her for the purpose of using the box box.”

2. On December 7, 2018, the Defendant, at around 05:17, obstructed the performance of official duties, at the police box around 05:17, sent the head of the security guards E one time by hand, who was demanded by the security guards to speak that he would not take a bath from the security guards E, and followed by the police guards, who moved the place at around 05:21 on the same day, pushed the left part of the E in one time.

As a result, the defendant assaulted police officers to prevent crimes and maintain order, thereby hindering legitimate execution of duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Written statements of D;

1. A complaint;

1. Investigation report (report accompanied by related CCTV images);

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

1. Relevant Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 311 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for the crime

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that there is no criminal conviction for the same offense, and the degree of obstruction of performance of official duties is not serious);