However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal power] On November 23, 2001, Defendant A issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Suwon District Court on March 26, 2002, and KRW 3 million for the same crime, etc. on March 26, 2002. On August 23, 2004, Defendant A was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime at the Dong Branch Branch of the Seoul District Court on August 23, 2004, and was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for the same crime at the Busan District Court on August 16, 201.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Defendant A

A. On September 18, 2014, the Defendant: (a) violated the Road Traffic Act and the Road Traffic Act (driving without obtaining a driver’s license); (b) was under the influence of alcohol by 0.150% of the blood alcohol content without obtaining a driver’s license on September 18, 2014; and (c) was translified from the front of a practice room in the name of Pyeongtaek-si and the front of a post office in the same Ri to the vehicle.

B. On September 18, 2014, the Defendant continued to be arrested as a flagrant offender for the facts constituting the crime described in the foregoing paragraph (a) and was investigated at the office D office of the Pyeongtaek-gu Police Station located in Pyeongtaek-si, Pyeongtaek-dong, Pyeongtaek-dong, Pyeongtaek-dong on September 18, 2014, saying that he would release B who was arrested as a flagrant offender due to the crime described in the following Paragraph (2) and was under investigation, and caused the Defendant to walk in a string at the market price.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged the goods used by public offices.

2. Defendant B committed assault, at the time, at the time, at the place specified in paragraph (1) of Article 1, Defendant B, at the place where the Defendant entered, and at the place where it was used, that he demanded a drinking test to A, who is a post-work pilot of the Defendant, to take a drinking level, and that he used the chest part of the Defendant E, as his hand, to 1 to 2 sealed the chest part of the Defendant’s chest, and to brea the breath.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the drinking measurement.

Summary of Evidence

O Defendant A

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the status of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the status of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the status of the driver under the influence of alcohol, and report on the results of drinking.