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

On March 29, 2016, at around 17:50, the Defendant: (a) stated that “The Defendant paid the taxi fee from a police officer, such as the slope C, etc. belonging to the Busan Police Station B of the Busan Police Station, who called the taxi at the seat of the Busan Police Station, without paying the taxi fee on the front of the Busan Special Metropolitan City, Busan Special Metropolitan City Public Security Center for the children’s large-scale road; and (b) stated that “I will pay the taxi fee to the head of the house; and (c) see that I would pay the taxi fee; and (d) assaulted the above C’s body part by hand, which would threaten the said C’s hand.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties to prevent crimes and maintain order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement protocol with respect to C and D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (the current status of damage and the closure of image data);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The execution of imprisonment shall be postponed by taking into account the following: (a) the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act [the scope of the recommended sentence]; (b) there is no basic area (from June to one year and four months) (the person subject to special sentencing) (the decision of sentence]; (c) there is no past record of any such type of power or any violent crime; (d) the degree of interference with public duties is not more severe; and (e) the fact that the degree of interference with public duties is against the law.