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

On August 28, 2016, the Defendant, at around 03:20 on August 28, 2016, went away without complying with the request of the victim D (30 years of age) who is a police officer belonging to the Suwon Police Station C District, dispatched after receiving a report of a disturbance near the road in front of the Sejong-si, Suwon-si.

Therefore, the victim was faced with the face of the victim, and the victim was faced with the right side of the victim, and the victim was faced with approximately two weeks of treatment.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers related to criminal investigation and inflicted injury on the victim at the same time.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of punishment for the crime

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. As to the defense counsel’s assertion of the allegation of the defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following favorable circumstances), the defense counsel asserts that the use of the electric shock devices by the police officer goes against the principle of police vision and does not have a duty to comply with the demand for presentation of identification, and that the Defendant’s act is self

The evidence duly examined reveals the following facts: (a) the victim, a police officer, who received a report that the defendant and the police officer would escape from a disturbance of drinking alcohol and demanded the defendant to produce an identification card (foreign registration certificate) to a foreigner; (b) the defendant fleded; and (c) the police officer, such as the victim, etc., posted the defendant; (d) the victim resisted the defendant; (e) the victim was faced by the victim; (e) the victim was faced with the right arms; and (e) the defendant was faced with the victim and obstructed the defendant's daily movement; and (e) the police officer E issued a warning to the defendant that the defendant

If so,