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

On April 29, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 11:00, Seocheon-gu B, Seocheon-si; (b) on the front of the Macheon-gu, Seocheon-si, Ocheon-si, Ocheon-si, the economic traffic of the Ocheon-si, and C public officials belonging to the spirits Team, who are under the control of the vehicles violating spirits, of the Defendant’s vehicle parking on the road, and (c) on the Defendant’s vehicle parking on the Dok Star Pick-si, and (d) on the photograph of the son’s photograph, C

“The photograph taken by C at the time of the words “,” but C did not comply with it, and assault C, by forcing C to delete a photograph taken by blocking C and depicing a photograph taken by it, and by forcing C to force a camera used in his hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the crackdown on parking of public officials.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol against C and E;

1. Application of photograph (List 2) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the punishment of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (a confession, reflectment, and a fine for the same kind of crime shall be imposed only once, but not less than ten years ago, and the extent of assault used is relatively insignificant and the extent of assault used is relatively minor; and a brut or bomer shall not be imposed at the time);