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

On January 15, 2016, at around 00:19, the Defendant reported that the Defendant did not pay the drinking value in the “D main point” located in the Donsan-si, Donsan-si, Donsan-si, the Defendant, at around 00:12, posted F of the military police station E box belonging to the Gunn Police Station, and the Defendant, who was faced with a schill to ascertain the circumstances of the instant case, was a shoulder, booming, and booming the f’s breath, and continuously prevented the Defendant’s behavior.

G Dobro blaps and assaulted the drinking by cutting down the flaps.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to H and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of victims;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act for the suspended sentence [the scope of the recommended sentence] The scope of the sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the mitigation area (one month to eight months) (a special mitigated person] the degree of assault, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor; (b) the defendant reflects his/her mistake; (c) there is no record of having been punished for the same type of crime; and (d) the defendant has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime; and (e) the defendant's age, reasons leading to the instant case, sexual behavior, and environment, which are the conditions