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

On August 11, 2017, at around 01:55, the Defendant confirmed the circumstances of the instant case, which is a police officer belonging to the regional police unit of the Namdong Police Station D, and sent F and witness as a D box, after receiving a report that the instant case was committed in front of the “C Hop” located in Young-gun B, Youngdong-gun, the Defendant: (a) reported that the instant case was committed; and (b) reported that the Defendant sent F and witness as a D box; and (c) whether they sent a match.

“The” sound was sounded to the purport of the Defendant’s right edge, and the part of the E’s buckbucket was set once, and the Defendant’s sloping E-line was set once by drinking with the Defendant’s lush hand.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention and suppression of crimes, such as handling reports by police officers 112.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to E, F and G;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] There is no person who does not have a basic area (from June to January 1), the basic area (from June to June) [the person subject to special sentencing] [decision of sentence], and the circumstances after the commission of a crime are not good. However, in the court, the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, motive and circumstances after the commission of a crime are considered as having been committed by misunderstanding her fry, thereby causing a crime. The fact that the person was suffering from ordinary disorder by failing to participate in her part of fry, seems to have been the cause of the crime. The fact that the basic life recipient after divorce, supports a child who was supported by children of the daily life, supported by children of the family, and was affected by her fluenite disease, and that there was no record of the crime in this case, and that the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, motive and circumstances after the commission of the crime in this case shall be determined by taking into account the following circumstances.