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

On March 2, 2019, at around 02:20, the Defendant: (a) 02:20 on March 2, 2019, the victim C (34 years of age) who was a patroler belonging to the Steering Police Station B police box called the Defendant, who was called out after receiving a 112 report, she saw the victim to stop the Defendant; (b) said, “In accordance with the weather order, the Defendant took a bath for the same region as the one of the other regions, and she took place with the body of the victim’s body, and the victim’s right hand, who carried the victim’s body toward the coast of the maritime park, shocked against the said rail.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers concerning the prevention, suppression, and investigation of crimes, and at the same time, the Defendant used approximately six weeks water dykes to the right side in need of treatment for the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of C or D;

1. Application of four Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a medical certificate and a flag photo of a flag;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is a case where the defendant inflicted an injury on a police officer in the course of performing official duties by assaulting the police officer, and the nature of the crime is not good, and the injured police officer is serious.

However, the defendant is seriously against the crime.

The defendant is the first offender.

In order to accept the truth of the defendant, the injured police officers have not been punished for the defendant.

On September 28, 2800, he is going to be married.

In full view of these circumstances, it is judged that the sentence of sentence on the defendant is harsh.

It is so decided as per Disposition by taking into account all the sentencing conditions shown in the records of this case, including the above circumstances.