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

On March 26, 2016, around 05:20, the Defendant: (a) sent to D’s house located in Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul and 102 with D’s desire to take a bath due to drinking parking problems; (b) received a report from D to set the entrance; and (c) “I am under the influence of alcohol” from F in the circumstances belonging to the Sungdong Police Station E division in Seoul, Sungdong Police Station E division, Seoul, which called “I am under the influence of alcohol, once I am under the influence of alcohol, once I am under the influence of alcohol, I am under the influence of alcohol” and continued to hear the horses, and was notified by F of F, even though I am under the disposition of F, I am under the influence of am under the influence of am under the influence of alcohol.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and G;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (to attach screen pictures at the time of arrest);

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria [Scope of the recommended punishment] and interference with the execution of public duties: The basic area (fence of the performance of public duties and coercion of the performance of duties).

2. The decision of sentence shall be made in the same manner as the disposition is made, taking into account the fact that the defendant commits a mistake, the occupation, age, circumstances of crimes, etc. of the defendant;