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.

Defendant and C are married, and D are children of Defendant and C.

On April 16, 2016, at around 01:10 on April 16, 2016, the Defendant, along with C and D, arrested the Defendant as a current offender on the front of the above restaurant “F main point “on the ground that the Defendant was making the said restaurant customer G while drinking alcohol,” and on the front of the above restaurant, he assaulted the Defendant, in his hand, by assaulting the said I’s nose, by unfolding and unfolding the face and shouldering the son, and C, by assaulting the Defendant “A” on his her her son’s seat and shoulder.

Dal Dozn Doz

Dok, the police committed a sexual indecent act

“In doing a bath with a large sound, a rank is opened on the left-hand side of the said I’s son by hand, and assaults, such as breaking the bat of the I’s bat, shaking the bat, and putting the KON, etc., and D means the cat of the batt bat.

Republic of Korea

C. The Defendant 1 expressed a brub by a large sound, “Ch.” and assaulted the chest of the J, by hand, by keeping the chests of the said J in hand, and opening the door behind the brush of the patrol car.

Accordingly, in collusion with C and D, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties by police officers in relation to the prevention, suppression, and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against D or C;

1. Each police statement made to G, I, and J;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on photographs damaged by damaged police officers;

1. Articles 136 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The sentencing criteria do not present a separate processing method for the ordinary concurrent crimes, but it is necessary to refer the sentencing criteria to the ordinary concurrent crimes as well. Thus, the sentencing criteria for the obstruction of the execution of official duties are examined in reference to the sentencing criteria.

2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing criteria [the types of decisions] shall interfere with the execution of official duties, and shall interfere with the execution of official duties.