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

The defendant, around October 31, 2016, around 01:20 on October 31, 2016, in front of the D District of the Seoul Guro Police Station, Guro-gu Seoul, Seoul, and on the same day, the defendant raised a trial cost for pedestrians.

“Along with the 112 report of the contents, the police officers belonging to the D District would have been subject to the removal from the said District, and the said District was found, and the slope E belonging to the said District would be recommended to return home to the Defendant, and the face of E would have been knifeed by the arms.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the maintenance of public peace and order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

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

1. Taking into account the fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is erroneous, the following facts are considered: (a) the nature of the crime committed by the police officer during the performance of official duties is inferior; and (b) the Defendant has already been subject to a disposition of suspending indictment two times due to the same kind of crime committed by violence; and (c) the sentence is