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

On August 26, 2017, at around 00:25, the Defendant was exposed to police officers D (V, 50 years of age) belonging to the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Police Station C District District, Seoul, which performed patrol at the same location as at the time when he was performing patrol, and requested D to provide identification cards in order to notify the Defendant, the Defendant did not comply with the request, and the Defendant was forced to stop the Defendant, and D was able to stop the Defendant, while taking a bath against D, the Defendant d’s walked twice by putting d’s flaps, and pusheded with D’s right-hand shoulder.

As such, the Defendant assaulted a police officer, thereby obstructing the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. A statement by the defendant to the effect that there exists a fact of selling D at the date and place on which the ruling was made;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of CCTV Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment.

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The defendant's responsibility for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is not less than the defendant's punishment, but is against the defendant's wrong, and the defendant's punishment is determined as ordered in consideration of the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment other than the fine for the last thirty years;