Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, as to the Defendants for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On March 22, 2014, at around 22:50, the Defendants: (a) committed assault, such as: (b) the Defendant was booming the chest of H on his hand, she was booming the Defendant’s chest of G and patrolman on his hand, she was crypting him with the background and the chest of H on his hand; (c) the Defendant was booming him to the face; (d) the Defendant was booming his chest of H on his hand; and (d) the Defendant was frighting him to the face; and (e) the Defendant was booming his chest of H on his hand; and (e) the Defendant was booming him to the left shoulder; and (e) the Defendant was booming him to the left shoulder.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to interfere with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of public peace and order of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Application of statutes on police statements made to H and G;

1. Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 136 and 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for the commercial concurrence (defendant A);

1. Selection of the penalty, and the decision of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendants and their defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 62(1)

1. The Defendants, under the influence of alcohol, committed the instant crime in a state of mental disability.

2. According to the evidence of the prosecutor’s submission of the judgment, it is recognized that the Defendants were able to withdraw alcohol at the time of the instant crime, but the Defendants were sufficiently able to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion by the Defendants and the