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

On December 14, 2014, at around 01:00, the Defendant, at the main point of “C,” located in G, which was located in G, G, which had been reported by customers to 112, followed the circumstances to which the Defendant belonged to the G police box called “C,” and the background to which the Defendant was called, “I am sprink, she reported. I am sprink, she was sponsed, sponsed, dead, and sponsed,” and acted as if I am sponsed on his/her table.

Accordingly, E prevents the defendant in his arms, and the defendant was in the control of E, and the defendant was in the control of E, and the defendant was in the control of E once with his head, and was in the control of E's 112 reported case, and was in the control of E's 112 reported case.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. Each statement of E and F;

1. Application of CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following circumstances, etc. considered as the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, Etc. [Scope of Recommendation] The basic area (6 to 1.4 months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (decision of sentence] / The decision of sentence] Defendant was sentenced to a fine due to violence, five times before and after the suspension of execution due to obstruction of performance of official duties, and the crime of this case interfering with the execution of official duties by assaulting a police officer who wear a uniform without any justifiable reason under the influence of alcohol. In light of the above, Defendant’s mistake is against himself and the same criminal record was committed before about 10 years prior to the sentencing of this case including the Defendant’s age, character, conduct, environment, etc., the condition of community service is limited to this time.