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

At around 14:00 on June 5, 2016, the Defendant: (a) sent to the site after receiving a report on 112, and tried to have the Defendant returned to the site, “I will not drink;” without any justifiable reason, the Defendant used the Seoul Yangcheon Police Station E-gu Seoul Yangcheon-gu E-gu Seoul, which used to have the Defendant returned to the site, to “N sprinke by spacking spacks,” and used the drinking cans to F, and used to walk F at once.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol of statement to F;

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

1. Suspension of execution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that there has been a history of punishment for several times as a crime of violence, assaulting a police officer in uniform and the liability for such crime is not less than that unfavorable to the defendant, but not that of the same kind of crime, confession and reflect on the crime of this case, confession and reflect on the crime of this case, the fact that the person committed a crime by drinking and by contingency, and the fact that the health situation is not good, etc. in favor of the defendant