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

1. On May 4, 2013, the Defendant damaged the victim’s property utility by assaulting the victim D within the “C dynasium B” located in the “C dynasium B in Chungcheongnam-gu, Gwangju, and then destroying the victim’s water purifier that is installed therein to the extent equivalent to KRW 200,000,000 for repair cost.

2. On May 4, 2013, from around 20:07 to 21:05, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s bar business by force by forcing customers whose name is unknown, such as having a stringer and a stringer on the calculation unit, who had been on the opening unit of the said 1. In addition, the Defendant got off a stringer and a stringer, who had a stringer in the stage, and had a stringer on the window, to stop drinking, thereby obstructing the victim’s bar business.

3. On May 4, 2013, at the same place as the above 1.45, the Defendant 20: (a) expressed a bath to the slope F belonging to the Gwangju Northern Police Station E District, which was dispatched after receiving a report on the said damage; (b) assaulted the slope F’s f’s f’s f’s bat to remove himself from the said main point by hand; and (c) continuously, the Defendant was arrested from the said F as a flagrant offender and arrived at the E District located in Gwangju Northern-gu, Gwangju, with the 112 patrol car and f’s f’s f’s f’s bat and f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s bat,

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each police protocol to D and F

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The rationale for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act is that the victim D and agreed with the victim is a favorable normal relationship.

However, the defendant.