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

Whether the Defendant, on January 2, 2017, would grow up in governance, to “a person who is recommended to return home from the border D belonging to the C District and dispatched after receiving a report from 112 that a fighting match occurred in front of the B building in the Si/Gun/Gu of 01:40 on January 2, 2017;

The 112 Report Processing Affairs interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers in relation to D's handling affairs, such as flaging the left-hand part of D's left-hand part by hand on the right-hand hand, flaging the shoulder on the left-hand part of D's police service uniforms, flaging D's drinking, flaging D's drinking, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do141, Apr. 1

1. The community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;