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

At around 22:50 on December 27, 2014, the Defendant brought a dispute over D's work and vehicle in Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul.

The defendant was no longer able to engage in D-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-

Accordingly, the Defendant committed assault against the above E, knenee, knee, knee, and assaulted against the above E.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties concerning the crime prevention of police officers E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol of suspect by the police against F and D;

1. Each police officer's statement of E, G, H, and I;

1. Application of H’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution [Scope of Recommendation] There is no person who has the basic principle (6-1 year and April) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (6-1 year and April) [Pronouncement Decision] of the Criminal Code. The crime of this case is not that of obstructing the performance of official duties by assaulting a police officer who has prevented the defendant from fighting against the defendant.

However, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: the defendant is against himself, there is no criminal record of the same kind, the social relationship is clear, and the motive, means and result of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime of this case, the age, character and conduct of the defendant, family environment, etc.