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

1. On October 15, 2014, the Defendant, at around 08:45, sent out after receiving a report of assault in front of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul, and obstructed a police officer’s legitimate performance of duties on the investigation and prevention of a criminal investigation by a police officer, by putting a bit of bitch bitch bitch bit, “The bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch.”

2. On October 15, 2014, at around 08:55, the Defendant: (a) arrested as a flagrant offender in the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul metropolitan Police Station C District; (b) notified the Defendant of the name of “G” in the confirmation column of the written confirmation of the arrest of flagrant offender; (c) forged the G’s private signature without authority for the purpose of exercising the name by displaying the name of “G” in the confirmation column of the written confirmation of the arrest of flagrant offender; and (d) submitted it to the said F, who is unaware of the fact, to the said F, as if it was genuine.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement of E and D;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of G (fence of private signature);

1. Application of investigation reports (illegal use in the name of a suspect and related Acts and subordinate statutes);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime (the point of obstructing performance of official duties, the choice of imprisonment), Article 239(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 239(2) and Article 239(1) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Suspension of execution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The Defendant’s crime of this case with the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for probation and community service order not only interfered with the police officer’s legitimate execution of duties, but also investigation by the investigative agency.