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

1. Around 01:00 on July 5, 2014, the Defendant, at the D toilet operated in Suwon-gu, Busan, changed the body of the Defendant, and changed the body of the Defendant, and she heard sound from the D toilet operated in Suwon-gu, Busan, to the victim E, who was suffering from the Defendant’s change, and was faced with the victim, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

2. The Defendant: (a) removed the victim C-owned market price Handbling, which was kept in the victim C-owned toilet by three employees on the ground that the above E requested support from other employees with no electricity at the time and place indicated in paragraph (1) for the foregoing reasons; and (b) removed the victim C-owned market price and added it after taking it off.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the Hand Hand, where the market price is unknown.

3. The Defendant interfered with business: (a) laid off the date, time, place, and her part of the set forth in paragraph 1; (b) laid off her mare and her mared with her mared; and (c) her mared from the toilet to the outside of the public performance; (d) she created a sense of aversion to customers; and (e) her hump and booms her hump against the customers who drink alcohol, thereby making them leave the place.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim C's above D business by force.

4. At around 01:40 on July 5, 2014, the Defendant committed assault, such as: (a) the police officer G belonging to the Busan Southern Police Station F Zone G, the Busan Southern Police Station, who received a report on the above act, brought his employees to a stude that he could connect the Defendant with a cleaning agent at one time on his hand; (b) the above G’s left and right face each time on the hand; and (c) thereby, the Defendant arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender and resulting in the injury and injury to the sprinks by sprinking him.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on public peace and order maintenance, prevention, suppression, investigation, etc. of crimes.

(i) the evidence;