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

1. Around 02:30 on November 10, 2019, the Defendant attempted to mix “C” located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “C” with the victim D (n, 49 years of age) and bombs without any justifiable reason, and the victim refused to do so, and the victim boomed the victim’s part of the breath, boomed the victim’s breath, and assaulted the victim by leading the victim’s bridge.

2. The Defendant openly insulting the victim by referring to “I wishing to die or to die a friendly one’s seat,” among four persons, such as E, on the date, time, place, and place indicated in paragraph 1, for the same reason as that indicated in paragraph 1.

3. The Defendant committed an act of obstruction of performance of official duties, at the time and place specified in paragraph (1), and at the place specified in paragraph (1) above C’s 112 report, and the police officer, who was a police officer belonging to the Seoul Young Military Police Station, committed an act of assaulting the Defendant, such as breaking the head of G by booming the Defendant’s head, and booming the bridge as a flagrant offender of violence and insult against the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the handling of 112 reported cases by police officers and legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. Each written statement of D and E;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to investigative reports (the results of checking the evidence of police officers) and caps;

1. Relevant Articles 136(1) and 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 311 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment for the crime;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is relatively large to the defendant, and the criminal investigation agency and the court continued to have been sentenced to a fine and suspension of indictment, but they did not repent and again committed each of the crimes of this case. The victims of this case did not agree with the victims of this case.

In light of the past history.