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

1. On August 9, 2018, the Defendant assaulted the victim’s left face at around 21:40 on August 21, 2018, when the victim F (n, 65 years of age) was removed from the Defendant’s intent to see the victim’s hair E, and he was able to see the victim’s hair face at one time by drinking.

2. The Defendant damaged property at the time, time, and place set forth in paragraph 1, with the influence of alcohol, and without any reason, the Defendant destroyed the Defendant’s repair cost of approximately KRW 150,000 by walking the victim G-owned gate gate in a breathing and breathing the shock net, and displaying the mold.

3. The Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties at the date, time, and place specified in paragraph 1, and committed assault, such as: (a) the circumstances belonging to the H District in the Pyeongtaek Police Station, I, and Police Officers, who called out after being reported by 112 that “Many woman fright to wear a fright,” and (b) the Defendant was drinking to ask the Defendant about the circumstances of the case, personal information, etc.; (c) the Defendant frights and frights of J on a hand; (d) the Defendant fuckbucks and frights of the J’s chest and frights; and (e) the Defendant frights the body of the I by hand.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F, K, and J;

1. Written statements of J, I, L, G, and F;

1. The 112 reported case handling table, DNA pentine photographs at the site of damage to property; and

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence), Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of damage to property) and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) of the relevant Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

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

1. Class 1 (Interference with the Execution of Official Duties) of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds of sentencing of Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence shall interfere with the performance of official duties.