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. On October 12, 2018, the injured Defendant: (a) around 05:17, in the “D” entertainment tavern operated by the victim C (here, 63 years of age) in Thai City B, brought about a dispute with the injured party due to the credit rating of the injured party; (b) on the ground that the injured party was a chemical accident, the injured party, walking the part of the bridge of the injured party on the floor, kiding the injured party on the floor, kiding the head part of the injured party on one occasion, thereby causing an injury, such as blood transfusion, etc., of which the number of days of treatment cannot be known to the injured party.

2. The Defendant damaged the property by walking a fire amounting to KRW 50,00,00 at the market price of the victim C, owned by the victim C, on the ground that the fire occurred continuously and continuously at the time and place specified in paragraph 1.

3. On October 12, 2018, the Defendant received a report from 112 to the effect that “D” in front of an entertainment drinking club “D” as stated in paragraph (1) was “D,” and recommended to return home from the police officer affiliated with the same police officer, who was dispatched to the site, but the Defendant was able to take the tobacco butts remaining in the face of the said G, and she was flicking in the tobacco but she was flick in the face of the said G, and she was flick in the said F’s chest flick flick flick flick flick flick flick flick flick flick flick flb flb fl.” On end, the Defendant assaulted the chest part of the said F F’s chest.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made to G, F, C, and H;

1. The Defendant asserts that there is no supporting fact of walking the victim C’s head from among the facts constituting the crime of injury as prescribed in paragraph 1 of the judgment below, 112 report processing table, on-site photographs, damaged photographs, caps and photographs, CDs (No. 9,19).

However, in full view of the following circumstances admitted by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant's assertion is recognized as the defendant's head of the victim C.