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

On February 24, 2019, at around 01:30 on February 24, 2019, the Defendant committed assault, such as: (a) at the residence of the Defendant of Gosung-gun B apartment Co., Ltd., and (b) at around 01:12, “The sound disputing male and female is cut off, details, and location confirmation,” and (c) the circumstances leading up to the D District E sent out after receiving a report, and the situation leading up to the E infashing from the ice F,” and (d) the hump theory that “I faf faf faf faf. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. Each statement of G and H;

1. Work log in the D District and a list of reported cases;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (Attachment of photographs of the scene of the case and damaged parts);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts (the point of each of the above crimes);

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;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to five years;

2. Scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of type] of the obstruction of performance of official duties or coercion of duties (special sponsers): In cases where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is insignificant (the scope of the recommended area and the recommended sentence] mitigation area, and one month to eight months of imprisonment.

3. Although four police officers were called up on the ground of domestic violence reporting, the defendant continued to move along with the police officers, the police officers did not have serious damage due to the instant crime, and the defendant did not have the same criminal record, and the age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the criminal defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and crime.