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

On August 11, 2013, the Defendant: (a) expressed in front of the “D coffee store” in Daejeon-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, that he would be urged to go home from a slopeF of the Daejeon East Police Station Estation, which arrives at the said coffee shop after receiving a report on the disturbance from him; and (b) again enter the said coffee shop, and (c) followed the said slope F into the said coffee shop, thereby keeping the said slope F’s body, and continuously tight F had a slope F’s body and 2.5 million won. As such, the Defendant did not want to see, she, she did not want to see, she, she did so, and she did not want to do so, and she did so, and she did so, and she did so, and she did so by force.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of police officers' order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of the statutes on photographs related to the case

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 stay of execution ( normal conditions, such as the fact that the defendant has the same record as the defendant, but the defendant reflects his wrongness, and that the defendant has a disability);

1. Probation and community service order shall be decided as ordered by the court on the grounds of Article 62-2 or more of the Criminal Act;