The execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Around September 26, 2018, the Defendant: (a) had her wife C (here, 49 years of age) and her wife in the residential area located in 23:05 Won-si B and 804 on September 26, 2018; (b) had a snicking conflict with the victim C (here, 49 years of age); (c) had been placed in the head of the victimized person; (d) had been placed in the head of the victimized person; and (e) had been placed in the head of other smelling expenses; and (e) had inflicted an injury on the victim, such as an open head, who requires treatment for about two weeks.

2. The Defendant at around 00:50 on September 27, 2018, who was arrested as a flagrant offender and detained in the detention room of the original police station D located in salary-ro 1 at the time of the original police station at the time, the Defendant, who was in charge of performing official duties, demanded that E, who is a police official belonging to the above police station, be subtracted from half of the police station at the time of the said police officer, would not be able to demand that the above police officer be subtracted.” In taking the above police officer’s desire to “I would not have this son.” At the time of drinking once, the Defendant interfered with the police officer’s performance of duties relating to the management

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement protocol of C and E;

1. Medical records and medical certificates;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs by cutting off on-site photographs and CCTVs;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 258-2 (1), 257 (1) and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense (the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act and the reason for the protection and observation of the protection and the community service order had been in conflict with each other, and the smelled, and caused injury to the police. As a result, the crime committed by assaulting police officers without any person who was able to be in the detention room.

It is also recognized that the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant commits a mistake, the recovery of the relationship with the victim who is the wife, and the victim expressed his intention not to punish, there is no history of criminal punishment due to the crime of violence tendency, and there is no history of criminal punishment exceeding the fine.

The above circumstances are as follows.