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

1. On June 28, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 23:45, on the front side of Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul, the victim C, along with a female-child ward under the influence of alcohol, was able to take a cryp cost; (b) the face and the part of the cryp of the cryp of the drinking face and the part of the cryp were carried out

2. On June 29, 2014, around 00:10, the Defendant: (a) arrested the victim C with an act in the act of committing a crime, such as paragraph (1) of this Article; (b) was arrested as a victim; (c) was on the back seat of the patrol vehicle; and (d) kidd the vehicle by walking the plastic protection door equivalent to KRW 170,000 at the market price of the patrol vehicle; and (c) was seated on the driver’s seat where the driver’s face, seat, etc., belonging to the Seoul Mapo Police Station E District E District of Seoul Mapo-gu, Seoul, and obstructed legitimate performance of duties concerning the investigation of a police official’s criminal investigation, etc.; and (d) damaged public goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Statement of each police statement against F and C;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 257 (1), 141 (1), and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. The reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances that are considered as the reasons for the sentencing) for the suspension of execution are crimes 1 (Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties) for the reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da1548, Apr. 1, 2009); the scope of the final sentencing due to the aggravation of the punishment for minor injuries (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da1448, Jun. 2, 2009).