A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Punishment of the crime

At around 02:40 on February 26, 2014, the Defendant: (a) reported at the top of the D convenience point at the entrance of the G apartment at Kimhae-si; (b) reported on 112, and reported that F of the background leading up to the G and H was listening to the instant case to the said G and H; and (c) took a bath to the said F, the Defendant dumped the f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s bat; and

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers related to the suppression and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to F of each protocol of police statement;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (including the fact that there is no particular criminal history, in addition to the previous conviction of a fine for interference with business);

1. The dismissal of prosecution under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. On February 26, 2014, at around 02:20, the Defendant, in front of the JJ located in Gyeongnam Kim-si, Kim Jong-si, the summary of the facts charged, the Defendant: (a) laid off a pursuant to the string in front of the JJ, and was passing through the said restaurant, and told the Defendant of the victim G (the age of 17) (the age of 17) that he dranked “the Defendant her house so that he dump was drunked so that he dumped by drinking alcohol.” (b) he sawd the victim’s hump with his hand, and dumpeded three times with his hump. (the age of 20).

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted victims.

2. We examine the judgment. This part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's explicit intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. According to each agreement bound in the trial records, the above victims can recognize the fact that they have withdrawn their wish to punish the defendant after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, this part of the indictment is dismissed under Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.