However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

On September 2, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 19:00, around the Defendant’s house entrance in Seoul, the Defendant: (b) at the front of the Defendant’s house located in Seoul, the defect that the Defendant attempted to enter into the house, E, F, G, and slope H of the Kuung Police Station D District, which was dispatched after receiving a report of domestic violence; (c) the police officers called “the police officers have been assigned to the house, as soon as possible,” and sent the front door (149cm in length, 149cm in length) which is a dangerous object used in advance; and (d) if the police officers enter the house, they threaten the police officers to leave the atmosphere, and subsequently, assault the police officers by gathering the bicycle, which is a dangerous object.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and interfered with police officers' legitimate performance of duties in relation to crime prevention and investigation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The witness E’s legal statement (the defendant only demanded the police officers dispatched in the course of marital fighting to return to the police officers, and there is no fact that police officers threaten police officers to the atmosphere, or left a bicycle to the police officers. However, according to the consistent statement made by the investigation agency and the court, this part of the facts charged is sufficiently recognized. Even according to the defendant’s statement, this part of the facts charged is sufficiently recognized. The police officers sent to the defendant’s statement that the police officers set up the atmosphere to the house and set up the wall on the wall of the bicycle to enter the house. Thus, the defendant’s assertion that police officers’ performance of their duties was not impeded is not acceptable).

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Articles 144 (1) and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing in Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the sentencing criteria are mutually concurrent crimes.