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

On May 3, 2016, the Defendant asked questions to whether the drinking value can be paid from E in the circumstances where the police box affiliated with the police box of the Pocheon Police Station D, which was called after receiving a report of the business owner due to the failure to pay the drinking value at around 02:20 on May 3, 2016, the Defendant would not pay the drinking value without any confirmation of the police officer’s questions.

Accordingly, the defendant, who was found by police officers to have tried to arrest the defendant as the current criminal committing an illegal act, was "Chewing, dead" to E;

He called the "brison", and assaulted the part of the E, the Inspector E, who walked once, on the other hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the control of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement in the police statement protocol against E;

1. Investigation reports (Attachment to these images), entry of closed circuits (CCTV) screen pictures in video CDs, and application of video-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. [the scope of applicable sentences under the law] [the scope of applicable sentences under the law] 5 years or less of imprisonment [the scope of recommended sentences] The basic area of interfering with the performance of official duties among the groups of crimes interfering with the performance of official duties [the scope of recommended sentences]: From six months to one year and four months (the ruling of sentenced punishment] from six months of imprisonment with prison labor, and assaulting the police in uniform for two years of suspended sentence during six months.

However, the punishment was imposed in consideration of the fact that the act of assault by the defendant was not significant, that the defendant led to the confession of the crime, that the defendant is against himself, and that he did not have any criminal records of the same kind or suspended execution.