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

On March 2, 2016, at around 22:25, the Defendant reported 112 that a assault was committed on the street in front of the D convenience points located in the Jeonju-gun, Jeonju-gun, and sent back to F, a police officer affiliated with the Estation of the Jeonju Police Station, who called the “whether he reported”, received twice the f’s chest part of the head, and expressed the victim several times.

Then, at around 22:50 on the same day, the Defendant expressed the victim’s desire within a police box located in the Yaju-gun GJ, and assaulted the victim by breathing breath of the victim’s bat.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning investigation by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to F, H, I, and J;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (CCTV image verification);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that the defendant who has no record of punishment heavier than the punishment of a fine repents his mistake and that the F and only agreed to do so);

1. Probation under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;