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.

1. On November 10, 2015, the Defendant damage property: (a) around 13:40 on November 10, 2015, the victim C’s “D” restaurant operated by the Defendant was in a non-smoking zone from the victim who avoided tobacco; (b) the Defendant received a request to smoke from the victim; (c) thereby, the Defendant destroyed the Plaintiff by shouldering one copy of the entrance door door, which is the victim’s market value, where the victim owned by the Defendant, who was on the table, sold tobacco at the government, and opened the string of tobacco, and caused the damage.

2. On November 10, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received 112 reports from the front of the restaurant of “D” and confirmed his/her intention to compensate for the circumstances of the case and the damaged entrance; and (b) requested on November 14:20, 2015, the Defendant, who interfered with the performance of official duties, to find out a lost wall to the Assistant F of the Police Station E box.

Therefore, F confirmed the restaurant proposal, but the defendant's wall was not found.

I do not see why there is no why there is any reason for the Defendant to go back to the main body after leaving the main body of the Defendant.

The term "F assaulted the right side part of F in drinking by drinking twice."

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement with respect to C and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of one copy of each photograph, one copy of the report processing case, and one copy of the work log;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties, the choice of imprisonment), and Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of destroying property and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) Type 1 (Interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of duties) that interferes with the performance of official duties (the scope of a recommended punishment)

(b)an offence of destroying property;