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

At around 21:50 on August 14, 2015, the Defendant was assaulted by the Defendant by drinking the above D and alcohol at the house of the Defendant’s female-friendly job placement D, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Seoul, by drinking the said D and alcohol.” The Defendant was asked to present his identification card from F of the police box affiliated with the Sungnam-gu Police Station E (PP) dispatched after receiving the above D’s 112 report, and from F of the police box affiliated with the Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, and the police box, who was asked for the above F to display his identification card. The above G used to stop the above G, and “I have no drinking flick, this flick, flick, flick, flick, and this flick.” The Defendant saw the Defendant’s head by scambling and flicking the instant G’s head.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression, investigation, etc. of the above police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

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

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Taking into consideration that the accused is against the defendant, has no criminal record in the same kind of crime and

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;