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

On April 29, 2017, at around 00:00, the Defendant: (a) made a statement on the developments leading up to the assault case to the police officer E and F during the course of signing a fighting at the scene after receiving a report from customers on the 112 fighting, the Defendant: (b) took the face of this Chapter as a mobile phone and secured evidence; (c) took the f’s cellular phone to secure evidence; (d) took the f’s face with the above f’s hand, carrying the hand of the above F’s cell phone citing the cell phone, and assaulted the f’s face with the f’s finger.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of CCTV-cape photograph Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [the scope of the recommendations given in the sentencing guidelines] - Fundamental area (fe.g., interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of duties) (f., June 1 to June 1) (f.g., a decision of sentence] - Unfavorable normal circumstances: The degree of interference with the performance of official duties in light of the degree of assault is not easy. - favorable normal circumstances: the Defendant recognized the commission of a crime and made a mistake against the Defendant.