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

On March 1, 2019, at around 02:30, the Defendant: (a) sent to the site after receiving a report from 112 to the effect that “the reception is being made” in front of C in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, the Defendant committed assault, such as the Defendant, on the ground that the police officer affiliated with the Seoul Eunpyeong Police Station D police box sent to the site after having received a report from 112, who was sent to the site, would have come home to the Defendant. (b) On the ground that “I am impe, this son, and this son son son....................., the Defendant used the Defendant’s desire to call back the clothes and the right bucks of the above E,

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. 112 reported case lists, work logs, and photographs;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. On the other hand, taking lectures and community service order appear to have a confession and reflect of the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act. While there are no records of obstructing the performance of official duties, it has been re-offending despite the fact that there are many persons who were punished by a suspended sentence of imprisonment or a fine due to the crime of larceny, assault and injury, etc., and the fact that there are habitss of exercising the violence under the influence of alcohol, etc. on the other hand, the punishment shall be determined as ordered by considering all other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, career, family relationship