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

At around 23:05 on March 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) received a report from a police officer E (the age 45) belonging to the said district forces, who was asked by the Defendant that the Defendant had not paid a taxi fee on the road located in Ulsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Police Station C District District; (b) on the front of the said district police officer, and (c) opened the taxi seat at the seat of the said police officer to be asked about the reasons for the payment of the taxi fee; and (d) opened the taxi seat at the seat of the said police officer and stopped at the seat of the said district; and (d) 4-5 times away from the taxi to the right part of the said E with the left part at the time of two times; and (e) assaulted the Defendant by putting the trees of E in good knife by knifeing them on two knifes.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in criminal investigations.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The application of the police statements to E and the D’s written statements to the Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime and Article 136(1) of the choice of punishment - Selection of imprisonment;

1. Aggravation of a suspended sentence as provided for in Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The sentence scope of recommendation according to the sentencing criteria for the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties (the sentencing scope of recommendation), category 1 (the sentence scope of obstruction of the performance of official duties) shall be limited to 6 months to 1 year and 4 months; and

2. Determination of sentence shall be made as ordered in consideration of the fact that the accused has no other penalty power, other than once a fine, and the fact that the accused has divided wrong facts; and