Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, it is against the Defendants for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 29, 2014, at around 23:55, Defendant A sent to the site after receiving a report on 112 on October 29, 2014, the Defendant obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties by assaulting and f, such as why she was treated by so far, why she was treated by so far, how she was dead, how she was dead, how she was dead, how she was dead, how she was dead, and how she was fluored, how she was fluored, and how she was fluored, and how she was fluored, and how she was fluored, and how she was fluored by assaulting the said E, F in his/her hand, and how she was tight and fluored.

2. Defendant B interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by a police officer who has worn a uniform by committing violence, such as pushing the above E, booming bating bat and sculing bat, at the same time, at the same place and place.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. Application of the respective laws and regulations of G, H, I and J

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Defendant A of ordinary concurrence: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution (the confession of all the accuseds, the depth of their errors, and the fact that there are only the past record of the punishment of a fine for each one time due to the act of immigration, and all other circumstances such as the circumstances leading to the crime and the attitude of the