A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

around 23:55 on February 9, 2016, the Defendant reported that he was a person who frank in C, and that he was in the influence of alcohol, and demanded the Defendant to return home to the Defendant by the slope F belonging to E District of the Western Police Station Ear in the Seobu Police Station called up, “We have been in the limit of fluoring.”

B. We expressed my desire to “I ambry profabry” and expressed my desire to “I ambry,” and assaulted the above F at a price on the left side of the F once, thereby interfering with the legitimate execution of duties of police officials concerning the maintenance of order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement and photograph of the police with respect to F;

1. Application of the G’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime: Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution: Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (within the scope of sentencing guidelines), type 1 of interference with the execution of public duties, basic area: six months: Normal circumstances favorable to one year and four months: No person subject to suspended execution or more, and circumstances unfavorable to him/her: A fine not exceeding 1.5 million won, such as damage to public goods, etc. (a fine of the Jeju District Court is imposed on February 24, 201);