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

On July 24, 2014, at around 23:10, the Defendant was unable to escape from the Defendant’s movement, such as taking away from the Defendant’s wife in front of the “C” pharmacy at a macro-si, and gathering of surrounding things. Around that time, the head of Dong-gu Police Station D District, who received 112 a report and called the Defendant, she shot the Defendant, and the head of the Dong-gu Police Station D District, called “I am home, I am home, I am back, I am for the Defendant,” and then I am back to the surrounding players, and I am am for it, and I am am for it, and I am am for it, and I am for the above part 4 times as drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the above E and interfered with the police officer's legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (6 to 1 year and 4 months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties [decision of sentence] The defendant confessions and reflects the crime of this case, contingent crimes, the defendant has no power to commit the same kind of crime, and other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing indicated in the records of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, home environment, means of crime, conditions after the crime, etc., shall be determined as per the order.