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

At around 16:50 on May 28, 2020, the Defendant: (a) stated that the police officer called up upon receiving a report of 112 that “New would wish;” “A police officer would be able to ask for the circumstances of the case; (b) he expressed a desire to ask the circumstances of the case; (c) “Ie C’s chest was frien, and refeat; and (d) assaulted C’s chest on two occasions due to his fingers; and (d) C’s chest was frien at one time.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted police officers, thereby hindering police officers from performing their legitimate duties concerning crime prevention and investigation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of investigation reports (verification of cellphones) , cell phone-cognating images, photo-fluor photographs, investigation reports (verification of CCTVs and listening to the statement of the telecom business owner), the provisions of Acts and subordinate statutes on cutting down CCTVs;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, including the fact that the defendant's mistake was acknowledged as late as late as possible, the fine was imposed, the fact that the defendant did not have any record of crime since 2012, and was hospitalized in the military after alcohol dependence over a prolonged period, etc., should be considered as favorable circumstances for the defendant. In addition, the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, occupation, occupation, family relationship, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be considered as being favorable to the defendant. The punishment shall be determined as ordered in light