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

On November 9, 2019, at around 02:25, the Defendant: (a) voluntarily moved to the “D Zone D Zone in Changwon-si Police Station D Zone in Changwon-si, Changwon-si; (b) was urged to pay the drinking value from the above B after receiving the 112 report; and (c) expressed the desire to “I am going to the earth, because I am to calculate the drinking value; (d) I am to the earth, am spacks, spacks, spackspacks, spackspacks, spackspackspacks, etc.”; and (d) he laid the spack of the vehicle key and cellular phone around the floor where B was located; (d) am to walk a cell phone away from the floor; and (e) assault B.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of B and E;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. The keys and mobile phone photographs of the damaged vehicle, the 112 reported case handling table, and the application of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

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;

1. The crime is not good, such as exercising a tangible force against police officers who perform public duties with the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

However, the defendant recognizes and reflects the facts of crime.

There is no record of punishment except for a fine of 700,000 won sentenced once.

In addition, the sentencing conditions, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances, circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as per the order.