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

On October 23, 2014, at around 17:15, the Defendant: (a) was off the clothes from the clothes in front of the Haak-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Cheongju-ro, 13, and was under disturbance on the road; (b) was required to take work from the slope D belonging to the Cheongungung-gu, the Cheongju Police Station C District, which was called upon 112 and called out after receiving the 112 report; (c) was put to drinking to Haak-do; and (d) was called “this spati, Haak-gu, Haak-gu, Haak-gu, Haak-gu, Haak-gu, Haak-gu, Haak-gu.” The Defendant sent a drinking to E.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duty by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Notification of a department related to the report of 112 case and application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the statement of 112 reported case settlement;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [Determination of the type of punishment], Type 1 of the obstruction of performance of official duties [Special Convicts] - Where the degree of assault and threat is minor: Special Aggravations: In a case where there are many damaged public officials, the crime of this case is heavy in light of the basic area [the scope of punishment of recommendation] [the scope of punishment of recommendation] from June to April, and the background or contents of the crime from June to April, and the circumstances before and after the crime.

Furthermore, the Defendant should be punished with severe punishment in that he/she expressed multiple criminal records related to violence (i.e., once a punishment, three times a fine, etc.) and that he/she committed the instant crime that assaults police officers at this time.

However, it is against the defendant's wrong, and police officers do not directly cause physical damage due to the defendant's assault, and it is the obstruction of performance of official duties.