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 July 29, 2015, the Defendant was suffering from disturbance, such as under the influence of alcohol, and being on the part of the Defendant, on July 29, 2015, at the “D cafeteria” located in Young-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Defendant: (a) was under the influence of alcohol, and (b) was under the influence of alcohol, and (c) was under the influence of alcohol, and (d) was under the influence of F, who was dispatched upon 112 and G, entered the restaurant, and was under the influence of F, she was under the influence of F, and she was under the influence of F and G, and was under the influence of F and its body.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the reported case by F and G 112, a police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness G and F;

1. Statement in each police statement with respect to G and F;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to the CD’s video [it is sufficiently recognized that the act of assault was committed to G and F, a police officer, as stated in the Defendant’s facts constituting a crime, according to the CD’s video recorded in the witness G, F’s investigative agency, and in this court’s specific, consistent, and consistent with each other’s statement

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., conditions favorable to the following reasons for sentencing)

1. Scope of the sentencing guidelines for recommendations / [type] Crimes interfering with the performance of official duties, interference with the performance of official duties, and Type 1 (Interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of duties) (Scope of the sentence of recommendation] Imprisonment with prison labor for six months - One year and four months;

2. In light of the circumstances that the Defendant, who was off his clothes and was called out at a restaurant, used violence to police officers called out, the Defendant’s sentence is not good. On the other hand, the Defendant was not subject to criminal punishment for the last ten years, and the Defendant was not subject to criminal punishment for the police officers, taking into account the circumstances favorable to that of the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, and motive for committing the crime, and taking into account the various circumstances shown in the argument of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, motive for committing the crime, etc.