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.

On September 26, 2017, the Defendant mentioned the fact that the police officer was dispatched to the police station as a assault case in the summary room located in Kimcheon-si D located in Kimcheon-si on September 26, 201, at around 00:36, Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si B, while under the influence of alcohol.

Does the reporter are the reporter.

” 는 등으로 근무 중인 경찰관에게 시비를 걸던 중, 파출소 소속 경찰관인 E가 피고인의 소란을 만류하며 신고 자의 인적 사항은 알려줄 수 없다 말하자 화가 나, 발로 E의 우측 정강이를 1회 걷어찼다.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes and the maintenance of public peace and order, such as the handling of reports by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on internal investigation reports (Attachment of photographs by capturing a course), investigation reports (Attachment ofCCTV White Sheet);

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

1. The punishment under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, based on the following circumstances: (a) the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, such as receiving a fine of 500,000 won for the crime of injury in 2016; (b) there is no criminal record exceeding the punishment or a fine due to the crime of interference with the performance of official duties; (c) the degree of interference with the performance of duties and assault and public duties; (d) the degree of