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

On September 19, 2015, around 00:10, around 00:10, the Defendant: (a) arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender under suspicion of assaulting another person by the police officer F by the police officer F, who belongs to the net police station E box of the net police station, called the Defendant, at around C’s main station located in B, at around 00:10, after receiving a report of 112 by the Defendant, and was arrested; (b) committed assault, such as: (c) taking the part of the above F’s, etc. into his hand three times; (d)

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of a flagrant offender by a police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to G, H and F;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Considerations, such as the violation of a mistake in depth, the first offender, the age, etc.);

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