Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and six months.

However, it is against the Defendants for two years from the date of the final decision of this case.

Punishment of the crime

On January 14, 2016, the Defendant 151 of 2016 (Defendant A) (hereinafter “Defendant A”) suffered from the victim due to the following reasons: (a) the 'F’ main point in E on January 14, 2016, when drinking together with the victim B (the victim B (the victim B (the victim B (the victim B(49 age) was in a dispute; and (b) the victim got out of the upper part of the victim's right eye and the left part.

[Defendant-Appellant 2016 Highest 399]

1. On April 15, 2016, Defendant A: (a) 20:52, the Defendant: (b) boomed with B while drunk around the H restaurant located in G on a wooden-si; (c) her police box affiliated with the G police box, and (d) her police officer reported that he/she was frighted by a drunk, and (d) her police officer dispatched to the said place upon receipt of a report at the 112 report stating that he/she was frighting by a drunk person.

When the above patrolman confirmed the circumstances of the case, the defendant Habn and the above patrolman "Ick before Nbnbn in front of the case under the influence of alcohol."

Chewing Eargue A. N. N. N. N. police

“In doing so, the said patrolman’s breast part of K was tightly pushed off and tightly pushed off the said patrolman’s breast part of K, the said patrolman’s breast part of K one time, and the PacificJ prevented the said part, and each assaulted the chest part of the said patrolman on one occasion due to the shoulder part.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers with regard to 112 reported mobilization service.

2. On the grounds stated in paragraph 1 at the date and time, at the place, the Defendant: (a) committed an act of assaulting the chest part of the Defendant’s chest on one occasion on the part of the Defendant, who was affiliated with the Bapo Police Station I police box; and (b) expressed that “this son equal to son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son son her at one time on the part of the Defendant’s shoulder son son son; and (c) committed an act of assaulting the chest part of the Defendant’s chest son son her face at one time on the part of the shoulder son.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers with regard to 112 reported mobilization service.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement concerning B, J, K, and L;

1. Each statement of L;

1. The Acts and subordinate statutes governing the parts of each damage.