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

On July 26, 2014, around 10:12, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers and EF, by carrying out a scambling twice as drinking the scam part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambling part of the scambage.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. The statement of each police officer made to F and G;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant assaults the police officers to obstruct the performance of official duties, and the defendant has been sentenced one time to suspend the execution of imprisonment for violent crimes and two times to a fine. However, although the defendant was sentenced two times to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for violent crimes, the defendant is committed for committing the crime, and has not been punished for obstruction of the performance of official duties, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of the following: