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

1. On December 12, 2014, at around 01:00, the Defendant damaged a “D” restaurant operated by the victim C of the Daejeon Pungdong-gu Daejeon, on the ground that he was under the influence of alcohol, and that he left the D’s large interest at the victim’s speech that he would come to his delivery, the Defendant damaged the number of standing signboards equivalent to KRW 95,00 at the market price at the entrance of the restaurant.

2. The Defendant committed an act of obstruction of performance of official duties at the same time and place as set forth in the above paragraph (1) above, and when he received a check from Daejeon Police Station E District, Daejeon Police Station E District, where he was called upon and received a report, and received a check from G in the circumstances where he was affiliated with the same affiliation, he saw the ebbbbbbbb of F three times in his hand, and boomed by the above G with his ebbbbbbb of G, thereby cutting off the floor by cutting off the ebbbb of G with his hand, and cutting off the ebb of the patrol car.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reports and the maintenance of order by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police statement of C, F, and G;

1. A criminal investigation report and a written estimate;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Where an act of assault and intimidation was committed against multiple public officials who perform the same duties as prescribed in Articles 40 and 50 (Mutual Crimes of Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties) of the Commercial Concurrent Act, multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties are established according to the number of public officials who perform official duties, and where the above acts of assault and intimidation are assessed as one act under the social concept, multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties are in a mutually concurrent relationship (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3505, Jun. 25, 2009). In light of the above legal principles, Article 2 of the Criminal Act constitutes multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties against multiple police officers, and the circumstances leading up to the occurrence of each of the above crimes.