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

On September 12, 2016, at around 23:45, the Defendant, upon receiving a report from 112, the Defendant: (a) expressed that “I ambling, I ambling, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, I ambly, and I ambly, I am the said police officer’s lawful performance of duties concerning criminal investigation and public security duties, and interfered with the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning criminal investigation and public security duties, by assaulting the said police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and C;

1. Application of the statutes governing the place of service for a police box;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (i.e., the confession and the attitude against the police officer, the degree of assault against the police officer is relatively heavy, and the defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the latest six years or more, etc.);

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act to provide community service or attend lectures;