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 April 6, 2016, the Defendant had driven alcohol by the Defendant while working for the restaurant proprietor and the parking problems in front of the D cafeteria located in the Gu, American, and American.

“The above restaurant business proprietor” shall refuse to take a drinking test in order to obtain a request for a drinking test from the assistant F of the Gu-U.S. Police Station E box affiliated with the above restaurant E box, and shall be set up on the flasing road, and the above assistant F, who is under the control from the above F, shall not “Ie flas.p.p.p. to the above assistant F.

There is no error in why we can drink the water at the convenience store.

개새끼야. ”라고 욕설을 하며 오른손 주먹으로 위 경사 F의 오른쪽 얼굴 부위를 1회 때리고, 계속하여 오른쪽 무릎으로 위 경사 F의 왼쪽 옆구리 부분을 2회 찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of 112 reports and the crackdown on drinking by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to the police with respect to slopeF;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (as to the current status of on-site mobilization and statements of reference witnesses);

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor in the mitigation area (one month to eight months) (person subject to special mitigation) of the mitigation area, such as the application of the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment], the scope of interference with the performance of public duties;

2. The crime of this case, which was determined to be sentenced, requires strict punishment for a crime obstructing the performance of official duties in order to establish the State’s legal order and eradicate a light of public authority as a matter of obstructing a police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning handling of 112 reports and regulating drinking.

However, in the process of arresting the defendant in the act of committing the crime of this case, the degree of assault itself does not seem to be particularly significant, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects it, and there is no record of the same crime.