A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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. Around 00:17 September 6, 2013, the Defendant driven a B Car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of approximately 0.210% from the 10km section to the national highway located in 6th 2036, from the pentaro-ro Yan-gun, Yongsan-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, to the penta-ro 226-11, “Fi-si” penta-ro penta-ro.

2. The Defendant: (a) while under the influence of alcohol, driven a car owned by the Defendant’s Defendant’s knife with the victim and his/her family members inside and returned to Korea; (b) around 00:17 September 6, 2013, the Defendant caused an accident of shock prevention of the side of the road on the national highway No. 6 located in the Pyeongtaek-gun of Gangseo-gun, Gangwon-do, which was located on September 6, 2013.

When the defendant listens to the bath on the ground that he cannot drive properly from the victim who was accompanied by his car, he cut off the back glass by drinking a car.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the back glass of the car owned by the victim to cover approximately KRW 1,50,00 for repairing costs.

3. At around 00:50 on September 6, 2013, the Defendant: (a) 00:50 on the place of the performance of official duties; (b) when the Defendant was asked from the slope E belonging to the Pyeongtaek Police Station D District, which was called upon receiving a report, she saw her bath, and her drinking her part of the instant E, which she saw her to her drinking, and her drinking with her drinking flag; and (c) was notified by the above E that he/she may be arrested due to the suspicion of the performance of official duties; (d) the Defendant her her freshed on one occasion by her hand, who was informed of his/her desire, such as “Chewing her fresh, which is a farch A, and the same farch farch.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on traffic regulation and criminal investigation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement concerning C and F;

1. E statements;

1. Control note, report on detection of a host driver, and a host driver; and