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

(e).

1. On June 8, 2019, at around 19:12, the Defendant damaged public documents, prepared a report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, which is a document used by a police officer D belonging to the Gwangju Police Station C District, who was called out after receiving 112 report that the Defendant driven a drinking alcohol on the front side of the Gwangju Police Station, and was used by a public office, and thereby, damaged the breath by cutting the report.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and at the same place as Paragraph 1, committed an assault by the police officer on the part of D, such as satisfing off D’s mouth, satisfing D’s batfat, satfating D’s batfat, and sating D’s batfat with his hand, thereby obstructing the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties on the handling of 112 Report.

3. When the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender in the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties at the same time and at the same place as Paragraph 1, the Defendant damaged the public object by taking the 12,000 won of the market price attached to E or E, which is an object to be used by the public office, as his head.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Photographs photographs of the damaged part of the police officer, on-site photographs, and photographs of the damaged patrol vehicle;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to shooting of public documents;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act (a point of damage to public documents), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act (a point of obstruction of performance of official duties), and the choice of fines for crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution is that the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is a serious crime detrimental to the function of the State by nullifying a legitimate exercise of public authority. In addition, the defendant, who is a public document, should have the state driver’s circumstantial report taken away from the report, and damaged the breath, and the nature of the crime is not good.

However, on the other hand,