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 February 21, 2017, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol in front of the C cafeteria in the racing city, on February 21, 2017, and was subject to measures for returning home on two occasions from a police officer dispatched to the site after receiving a report from the E convenience store located in D on the same day on the same day at around 01:20 on the same day.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without returning home on the same day, was under way in front of the G convenience point located in the 02:33 on the same day, and was dispatched to the scene after receiving 112 reports, and she heard that he would return home from I to the police officer of the racing police station H box belonging to the police station, who was dispatched to the site.

I died of the knife in the Republic of Korea.

“The Basure” and assaulted the shoulder and chest of the said I by hand.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reports and maintenance of order by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. Investigation reports, internal investigation reports (investigation reports on suspected crimes that obstruct the performance of official duties), and application of statutes governing the place of service;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. Where the application of the sentencing criteria [the scope of the sentencing guidelines] is minor that the degree of interference with the execution of public duties, such as assault, intimidation, deceptive scheme, or public duties, is minor;

2. In this case, the sentence of sentence is a case in which the defendant assaultss a police officer who is under legitimate execution of official duties, and the nature of the crime is not weak.

However, considering the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects, the exercise of tangible power is relatively minor, the fact that the disabled children should be supported by the physically handicapped children, and other factors of sentencing as shown in the trial of this case, the punishment shall be determined like the order.