except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On August 5, 2016, the Defendant returned home from E, F, etc., a police official belonging to the Busan City Police Station D Zone D, who was under the influence of alcohol in the vicinity of the Busan City, on August 5, 2016.

As you see, E, “I would like to display a drinking,” and “I would like to do so, I would like to do so only once,” and assault F, such as “I would like to do so, I would like to do so,” and interfere with the performance of duties of the above police officials concerning public safety and order maintenance.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of the E, F, and G;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

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

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

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution [Scope of Recommendation] is acknowledged as follows: (a) where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor in the area of special mitigation (one to eight months) (special mitigation) [Special Mitigation]; (b) where there is no penalty (one type, one type, and one serious injury] [decision of sentence] in order to protect the legitimate performance of the public duties of the State and to establish a sound social order, the crime of obstruction of performance of the public duties of the State requires strict punishment; (c) two police officers are crimes that interfere with the performance of their public duties by using violence; and (d) there was a lack of disturbance even after the earth was committed.

On the other hand, there are also circumstances such as the fact that the defendant is against the mistake, the degree of violence inflicted on police officers is not much serious, the fact that the injured police officers sought a letter of intent to find two times, that they agreed with them, that there was no record of criminal punishment except once a fine, and that there was no record of criminal punishment for the same crime.

The Defendant’s age is the Defendant’s age.