A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 24, 2017, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties: (a) on September 24, 2017, at the location of D convenience stores located in Ansan-si; (b) on September 24, 2017, at the boundary of the delivery of the E-Poter, and was driven and reported by 112; and (c) on the part of the patrol box belonging to the E-Poter Fab police box called out after receiving the report, the Defendant followed the Defendant’s cargo vehicle; (d) on the part of the Defendant; and (e) on the part of the Defendant’s cargo vehicle,

Dozers, Doz., Doz., Doz.

“Abreathing” and “abreathing a drinking soft while drinking abreath,” and “breathing a drinking breath,”

drinking;

was drinking

C. He saw off the slick G’s slick G’s slicking slicking slick and slicking slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick G’s face.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the prevention and suppression of crimes.

2. On September 24, 2017, the Defendant: (a) was arrested as a current offender on the same act as the foregoing paragraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act around September 23, 2017; and (b) was compelled to take the Defendant into custody of the F police box located I location when he was aware of the fact; (c) at the time, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, including the following: (a) the Defendant snicking and smelling a smell; (b) the Defendant snicking and snicking a large range of walking; and (d) the Defendant was driving the said snick under the influence of alcohol.

Due to reasonable grounds, there was a demand for responding to the measurement of drinking by inserting three times in a drinking measuring instrument for about one hour.

Nevertheless, the defendant refused this and did not comply with a police officer's request for alcohol testing without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on driving under drinking;