A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. From May 17, 2019, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Drivers, Violence, etc.) (hereinafter referred to as “Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) (hereinafter referred to as “Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) (hereinafter referred to as “Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) was in C cafeteria located in Scheon-si B on May 17, 2019, while driving E Carrens vehicles owned by the Defendant, thereby moving to Gangwon-do Kuwon-

At around 22:00 on May 17, 2019, the Defendant boarded the back seat of the foregoing vehicle and proceeded with the Fluth of Macheon-si from the Songcheon-si, Young-si, Seocheon-si, the Defendant: (a) made a assault by the victim, such as putting the victim’s head, who is driving on the back seat on the ground that he/she does not comply with the assault, but runs without complying with the assault; (b) caused the victim’s body to take the hand.

Accordingly, the Defendant assaulted the driver of a vehicle in operation.

2. In response to the injury, the Defendant stopped the above vehicle on the road of the second line, moved the vehicle from the back seat to the back seat, let the victim start the vehicle and proceed to 400 to 500 meters. On the road of the second line, when the victim stops the above vehicle on the road of the second line, the victim stopped the vehicle on the road of the second line, thereby allowing the victim to get off the right side of the victim by walking off 4 to 5 times, and let the victim get off the vehicle from the driver’s seat, by assaulting the victim, such as the victim’s dump and tension, and dump spinging down on the road of the second line, etc., which requires three-day medical treatment.

3. Around 22:00 on May 17, 2019, the Defendant assaulted the victim’s head by destroying her flaps with her flaps, when the police box affiliated with the Macheon Police Station, which was called out after having reported 112 on the same grounds as the preceding paragraph, and the Defendant prevented the Defendant.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported duties.

Summary of Evidence

1..