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

On September 10, 2014, the Defendant: (a) sent to the scene by a police officer who was under the influence of alcohol at a “C” restaurant located in B at a permanent residence on September 10, 2014, following the Defendant’s report that he would drink with the customer, and sent the victim’s back to the police box after having arrived at the police box by having the Defendant and his day D, in order to have the Defendant returned home; (b) stated, “I am flick, flick, flick, flick, flick, flick, flick, flick, flick, flick, flick, etc. of the victim’s back part at the permanent police station E zone, which is the victim.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers on the handling of civil petition reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol of statement to F;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (six months to one year and four months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (a person with a special punishment] (a decision of sentence] The degree of damage suffered by police officers, the degree of damage suffered by police officers, and the fact that the defendant appears to have a confession and reflect attitude as a primary offender, etc.