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

On July 2, 2014, at around 17:26, the Defendant: (a) moved to the B zone by a slope C belonging to the B zone, who was dispatched after receiving a report of 112, such as throwing things from drivers, who are under the influence of alcohol in the exit of the 3rd party located in the Seongbuk-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Seongbuk-gu, Daejeon.

From 17:50 on the same day to 17:55 on the same day, the Defendant expressed at the back seat of E 112 patrol units E, from the 17:50 on the same day, to the front of the “B Area” located D, the Defendant continued to remove the above C’s back head debt at hand, 2-3 times by leaving the Defendant’s back head shoulder and the upper part of the work clothes on C’s shoulder at the shoulder rank and the end of the work clothes on his hand, in which the police officer expressed that “it is infected with dementia, Chewing,” and he puts the hand into the safety partitions installed in the A-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-

The Defendant continued to arrest a flagrant offender under suspicion of obstruction of performance of official duties and transferred to the B District Office as above, and, on the ground that the Defendant stated that he was satisfeed with his hand, he was satisfe with his own neck, and that F, the head of the patrol team, was assaulted by the F, who was the head of the patrol team, in turn, tried to restrain him from doing so.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of police officers' order and crime prevention.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement related to C and G;

1. A written statement;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. Application of statutes on photographs of damage;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The fact that Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution appears to have committed the instant crime in a contingent state where the Defendant suffers from a dynamic disorder, and that the Defendant’s children are trying to care for the Defendant in the future.