However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On December 19, 2016, the Defendant received a report from the fire officer belonging to the Seoul Yongsan Police Station C Team of the Seoul Yongsan Police Station that the Defendant was frighting to wear a fright at the Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu 196, and received a demand for the Defendant to move out from the said D, etc., the Defendant called the said D’s fright to wear a frighting fright at the center, and received a call for the Defendant to move out from the said D, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention of crimes and criminal investigations by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. E statements;

1. Application of CCTV CD-related statutes;

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

1. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, considering the fact that the crime of this case was committed by assaulting a police officer who performs official duties, and that there is no record of the same kind and several times of violence against the defendant, under the unfavorable circumstances, the defendant has no record of exceeding the fine, and the fact that the crime was recognized and is in profoundly contradictory to the record and arguments, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all other circumstances shown in the records and arguments.