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

1. On October 08, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 00:30 around 00, the victim C (the 51-year-old), who was sent to the site at the “E cafeteria” operated by the Defendant, was the victim G, assistant H, and policeman, who was a police box affiliated with the Jincheon Police Station Fast, who was sent to the site at the “E cafeteria” operated by the Defendant; (b) the Defendant was only the Defendant, and (c) the owner of the business, and the customer, who was the victim of the instant defect, who was called to have returned home only to the Defendant, and (d) whether he was aware of the excreta. The Defendant was aware of the fluor of the fluor, bit of a bitch.

v. N. N. L. L.I.T.T.T. L.N.T.T.T.

Whether he died of a person or not.

Chewing . Chewing . Sicks . h. homicides or magazines. .....” The Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender under the aforementioned suspicion of insult, and deemed as C, etc. even after he was arrested as a flagrant offender and carried out with the F police box, and whether the Defendant G was drinking by “C. Hap head . h. S. Mobs.”

We look at the low age of sheshel, but it seems to do so, and shel's lives.

“The victims were openly insulting by openly booming them for about two hours.”

2. On October 8, 2015, the Defendant: (a) arrested on the street in front of the Jincheon Police Station as a flagrant offender and arrived at the police station as a suspicion of insult; (b) opened a patrol gate to the victim G to leave the police station; (c) obstructed the legitimate performance of duties by police officers with regard to the criminal investigation, etc. of the victim’s left part of the victim’s drinking, and at the same time interfered with the victim’s legitimate performance of duties; (d) at the same time, the Defendant carried out two-day medical treatment for approximately two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

§ 1. Facts

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement by the police in relation to C and G;

1. Each statement of G, H and I;

1. Second fact in the judgment of the complaint;

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A written answer;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of victimized police officers;

1. Articles 311, 136 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act (the defendant is a victim G, H, and I in a restaurant).