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

On April 17, 2016, the Defendant was assaulting “C” restaurant located in Gwangju City B on the street on April 17, 2016, and was dispatched to the site after receiving a report of 112 that domestic violence occurred, and the background F of the position of the Gyeonggi Police Station E District, and slope G sent to the site were the Defendant, and the Defendant Company Company “I” himself.

“Abruting”, assaulting the F’s body twice in a shoulder, intending to brut it by drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on handling 112 reported duties and maintaining public order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police in relation to the victim or D;

1. Each photograph;

1. Each internal investigation report and the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the investigation report;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (the fact that it reflects the truth in depth and has no record of heavy punishment);

1. It shall be so decided as per Disposition for the protection and observation and community service work for not less than two reasons under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;