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.

On November 7, 2016, at around 22:20, the Defendant:20, obstructed the operation of the patrol vehicle by opening the back of the patrol vehicle and speaking to F with the consent of E and F after hearing the circumstances of the instant case to the police officer belonging to the police box of the Daegu achieved 112 who was called and called “D E” in front of the Daegu achieved Maart, and the Defendant was able to talk with the Defendant by having the Defendant go to the police box of the Daegu achieved 112 after receiving the 112 report, and having the two persons go to the police box of the police station of the Daegu achieved 112.

Accordingly, the Defendant, while taking a bath to the above H, took three times as drinking a part of H’s worship, and obstructed the front of the patrol vehicle in front of the patrol vehicle, and “the police officer is friendly with the patrol vehicle.”

The term “satisfy,” and the bat of H’s bat, was satched and satched.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with H’s legitimate performance of duties regarding H’s 112 Reporting, and at the same time, the Defendant inflicted injury on H such as cage cages, tensions, etc. in need of two weeks’ treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Each police statement made to I and H;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to arrest and report the occurrence of a case and report internal investigation;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. 양형기준 ▣ 공무집행 방해 [ 권고 형의 범위] 공무집행 방해 > 제 1 유형( 공무집행 방해/ 직무 강요) > 기본영역 (6 월 ~1 년 4월) [ 특별 양형 인자] 없음 ▣ 상해 [ 권고 형의 범위] 일반적인 상해 > 제 1 유형( 일반 상해) > 감경영역 (2 월 ~1 년) [ 특별 감경( 가중) 인자] 경 미한 상해 (1 ,4 유형), 처벌 불원( 피해 회복을 위한 진지한 노력 포함) 또는 상당 부분 피해...