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

At around 01:40 on August 6, 2017, the Defendant: (a) received 112 report from the operator of the instant singing club that he was drunk; (b) received the notification from the operator of the said singing club; and (c) demanded the Defendant to return home, and when the F or G (44 years old) demanded the Defendant to have the Defendant broken and returned home, the Defendant calculated the face of the said F on his hand on one-time basis; and (d) committed assaulting the said G’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s fat, which would be necessary for the treatment of approximately 2 weeks, by assaulting G’s f’s f’s fat as soon as possible.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with police officers' prevention and suppression of crimes and other legitimate performance of duties concerning public peace and maintenance of order, and at the same time inflicted injury on G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement concerning G and F;

1. A H statement;

1. Application of the relevant written opinion, each relevant photograph, each 112 reported case processing list, E global service log, and the video CD-related statute;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, as to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under the Criminal Act, the Defendant asserted that he was in a state of mental or physical loss due to drinking at the time of the instant crime. As such, the records show that the Defendant was under medical treatment due to symptoms, such as depression, influence, and impulse, but, in full view of the circumstances such as the background and result of the instant case, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, it cannot be seen that the Defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion cannot be accepted.

The police officer who is performing legitimate official duties for the reason of sentencing.