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 25, 2015, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s main business by force, such as: (a) at the drinking house operated by the victim C located in Pyeongtaek-si on August 25, 2015; (b) at the drinking house operated by the victim C, for customers who were in approximately 25 minutes under the influence of alcohol, i.e., at the drinking room, i., e., at the time of drinking; and (c) at the time of driving away from the business place, i.e., getting the victim’s grandchildren and driving away from the business place.

2. On August 26, 2015, the Defendant is not required to have a police officer who was urged to return home from F to the police officer who was dispatched after receiving a report of the interference with the duties of paragraph 1 on the front of Pyeongtaek-si, 200:10 on August 26, 2015.

B. "I do not have any duty," and, at the same time, the police officer did assault by one hand, such as putting the hand of the police officer, and selling the boom by another hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on handling 112 reports and maintaining public order.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business) and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

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. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of the final sentence due to multiple crimes, where the degree of the power, deceptive scheme, or the degree of the obstruction of duties is insignificant in the area of Class 1 crime (Interference with Duties) applicable to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the punishment for which recommendations are made] (the scope of the punishment for which recommendations are made] in the mitigated area of Class 1 (Interference with Duties) (Special Mitigation) in the mitigated area of crimes (Interference with Duties and Duties), the reduced area of Class 1 (Interference with Duties and Forced Duties) in the mitigated area of crimes (In January 8) in the mitigated area of crimes (person subject to special mitigation) (where the degree of violence, intimidation, and fraud is minor, the scope of the final sentence due to multiple crimes: one month to one year;

2. The defendant's liability for the crime in light of the content of the instant crime.