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

On August 22, 2020, around 06:55, the Defendant continued to leave the scene even though police officers E and F, who were affiliated with the D District Police Station in the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and tried to make a statement on the process of assaulting the Defendant from the Defendant. As the Defendant was prevented from leaving the scene from leaving the scene, the Defendant was able to cut off two arms of the above E on two hand, and the said F, who was witnessed, did so at the right side of the Defendant’s left part, and assaulted two times, such as: (a) the Defendant 112, who was under the influence of alcohol; and (b) the police officers E and F, who were affiliated with the D District Police Station in the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu; and (c) the said F, who was under the influence of drinking, attempted to wear the Defendant’s trade.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officer in G;

1. Each police statement made to F and E;

1. A photograph of the part of the assault, a fymp fymp or a fymar;

1. Blucs cambbling and flucamba CDs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on internal investigation (as to the verification of the state of a DNA camp);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act in relation to the facts constituting an offense (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) of the same Act;

2. Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act (aggravating concurrent crimes with the punishment determined by the obstruction of the execution of official duties against F heavier than that of each crime listed in the judgment);

3. Selection of sentence of alternative imprisonment;

4. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution.

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five years;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six months but not more than two years and not more than three months (the sentencing criteria are not applied as commercial concurrent crimes, but for reference);

(a) Base and concurrent Crimes 1: Suspension of the performance of official duties / [Type 1] interference with the performance of official duties / [no person subject to special sentencing] [the scope of decisions and recommendations in the sphere of recommendations] basic areas: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months from six months to one year and six months;

(b) Standards for handling multiple crimes shall be met;