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

On June 8, 2019, around 00:52, the Defendant: (a) 00:52, and around C’s main points in the fourth floor, and (b) flab customers, who drink with D, a husband having a de facto marital relationship, wanting to dance with the Defendant; and (c) upon receiving the said D’s report and being arrested as a flagrant offender of the crime of assault, F (38 years of age) who was a police officer belonging to the Jeonyangyang-gu Police Station E District E District of the Jeonyangyangyang-gu Police Station, a police officer called up upon receiving the said D’s report and sent to the Defendant, was arrested as a flagrant offender of the crime of assault.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of a flagrant offender by a police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of CD image Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Although the nature of the instant crime for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is not good, the sentence as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) the details of the instant crime; (b) the background leading to the commission of the crime; (c) the Defendant was the primary offender; (d) police officers do not want the punishment of the Defendant; and (e) whether the Defendant was reflectd or not;

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.