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

On March 11, 2014, at around 02:00, the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender due to the suspicion of fraud due to theless taking-out of a police box affiliated with the police officer E, who was called out after receiving a report on the drinking value after drinking alcohol at C dan C, which was located in Goung-gun B.

The Defendant: (a) committed an act of assaulting the police officer, such as flabing flabing the flab, etc., with the Defendant’s flab, following the Defendant’s desire to take the Defendant’s arms and carry on the patrol car; and (b) obstructed the police officer’s lawful performance of duties regarding the arrest of a flagrant offender.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement to F and E;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Obstruction of the performance of official duties, reporting on mobilization to the arrest site of a person suspected of fraud, and the application of statutes;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution ( normal consideration of the reasons for the suspension of execution);

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] Article 62-2 of the Act on the Performance of Official Duties shall be decided as ordered by the disposition, taking into account the following: (a) there is no basic area (6 to 1 year and 4 months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties [decision of sentence] [decision of sentence] imprisonment for six months; (b) suspension of execution 2 years; and (c) community service work 80 hours; (d) the defendant reflects the instant crime; (e) the criminal records due to the same kind of violence are only minor criminal records.