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.

피고인은 2017. 12. 05. 02:10 경 부산 동구 C에 있는 D 주점에서 그 곳 업주와 말다툼을 하고 소파를 집어 들고 던지려고 하는 등 행패를 부리던 중, 112 신고를 받고 출동한 부산 동부 경찰서 E 지구대 소속 경위 F이 피고인에게 그 곳에서 퇴거할 것을 요구하자 위 F에게 주먹을 휘두르고, 발로 F의 어깨 부위를 1회 찼다.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court (two times);

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Application of the law of the police statement protocol to F;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for the crime (elective of imprisonment);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] No. 1 (Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties and Compelling of Duties) in the basic area (from June to June) [Judgment of sentencing] [Judgment of sentencing] has the same history as the defendant; the degree of interference with the performance of official duties; the degree of interference with the performance of official duties; the attitude of recognizing and opposing the facts of the crime in this case; and other circumstances, including the background, means and methods of the crime in this case; the circumstances after the crime was committed; the defendant's age; sexual behavior; and the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act as shown in the records and arguments, such as the environment, shall be determined as the order.