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

around 04:58 on April 26, 2017, the Defendant “A, a woman unable to return home under the influence of alcohol” in front of the “C,” which was called “C,” was called out by the police officer E affiliated with the original police station of the police station of the original police station who was called out after receiving a 112 report, and went forward to the F in front of the original police officer’s home. After the said police officer recommended the said police officer to return home, the said police officer was able to take a bath, and the said police officer’s chest was pushed down with both hand, thereby hindering the said police officer’s physical protection, and hindering the execution of duties regarding the handling of the

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to E and G;

1. 112 A list of reported cases;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (hereinafter referred to as the “investigation Report”);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order [Scope of Recommendation] The mitigated area (i.e., interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of official duties) (i.e., January to August) of the mitigated area (i., January to August), (ii) where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor (i.e., a judgment of sentence] the decision of sentence] the State’s legitimate performance of official duties, and the establishment of sound social order, need to be strict to interfere

Although the Defendant recognized a crime and has no record of criminal punishment beyond a fine, the crime of this case was committed by assaulting a quasi-police official in charge of the Defendant, who might pose a danger to safety due to alcohol to the patrol vehicle. Although the crime of this case was somewhat weak, in light of the motive of the crime or the circumstances leading to the crime, the crime was poor in light of the motive of the crime and the circumstances leading to the crime; the Defendant, who was arrested as an offender and transferred to the police station after being transferred to the police station, was seriously poor in the circumstances after the crime was committed; and the Defendant, on the record, sought a proper apology and a letter to the police official.

It is difficult to find out any material that can be seen from the court.