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.

On August 3, 2016, the Defendant: (a) received a report from a person without the name of 112 in the name, “I am unclaimed 2 in the ice rink, a 216 Second Park,” and notified the Defendant that “I am 50,000 won shall be imposed on the penalty due to negligence in managing dangerous animals,” which was sent to the scene by C, who was sent to the scene, around 18:20 on August 3, 2016, the Defendant: (b) received the report from the name, “I am ring, I am, I am, and I am am, because I am son was kn't kn't kn't kn't kn't kn't kn't kn't kn't kn't.

“The foregoing C’s act of cutting off the cell phone and cutting off the evidence to the floor,” and the said C’s act of cutting off the cell phone used on his hand by unfolding the left hand of the said C so that it interfered with the police officer’s legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the reported case by 112.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (limited to work logs and photographs of return dogs);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (see, e.g., the confession of a crime and the attitude against a police officer, the degree of violence against a police officer is relatively minor, and the defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the last ten years or more);

1. An order to attend a course under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;