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

The defendant shall correct "2018..." as "2019....." in the indictment ex officio in 2019.

1. At around 15:37, on the ground that the police officer E, belonging to the Seoul Seongdong-gu Police Station D Zone D District of the Seoul Sungdong Police Station, was aware of the personal information of the police officer E, on the ground that the police officer E, who was taken place in front of Seongdong-gu Seoul, was aware of the personal information, and used the E’s e-mail twice by the knife, and used the E’s knife with the knife twice by the knife, and used the E’s knife by his hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to the handling of reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. Type 1 (Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties and Compelling of Duties) of the basic area (six to one year and six months) (special person) of the sentencing criteria set forth in the sentencing criteria;

2. Circumstances unfavorable to the decision of sentence: The above circumstances and the sentencing conditions specified in the trial process of this case are comprehensively taken into account that the defendant had been punished several times as well as violent crimes, and that there was a record of being punished by a fine due to the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. around 2009: The extent of assault against the crime of this case is not very serious.