A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

(e).

Punishment of the crime

Around 08:00 on June 29, 2014, the Defendant expressed that the police officers belonging to the Seoul Mapo Police Station Edistrict of the Seoul Mapo Police Station, who were called up after receiving C’s 112 report at the D restaurant operated by Mapo-gu Seoul (44 years of age), demanded the Defendant to stop the disturbance and return home, and thereby, the Defendant expressed that “n't flusium flusssium,” and “flusium fsium and the end of the police life, are the same as that of the police life,” and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning police officers’ public security and maintenance of order by assaulting the Defendant two times with her her sloping, her body, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of C’s written laws and regulations

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. The reasons for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act are as follows: (a) the overall sentencing conditions shown in the arguments in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment; and (b) the recommended sentence specified in the sentencing guidelines shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account

The Defendant made a confession of all the crimes of this case and is in profoundly against the Defendant.

B. On January 22, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine for assault by the Seoul Northern District Court on two occasions.

C. The dismissal of public prosecution that has no basic area (6 to 1 year and 4 months) of the basic area (6 to 1 year and 4 months) set forth in the sentencing guidelines (the scope of recommendation) for the obstruction of performance of official duties

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the point of the charge of assault is that “the Defendant assaulted twice the face of C in drinking out of the restaurant without any particular reason by deceiving C himself/herself, while disputing with his/her daily activities at the D restaurant operated by the victim C (the victim C (the victim of 44 years old) located in Mapo-gu Seoul around June 29, 2014.”

2. The facts charged in this part of the judgment are the crimes falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which are clearly indicated by the victim in accordance with Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.