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

Around 23:00 on May 26, 2020, the Defendant requested the police officer from the victim D (Nam, 30 years of age) who is a police officer belonging to the Daegu Gangseo-gu Police Station C District District District, which was called upon the Defendant’s home violence report at the Defendant’s home located in Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu North Korea Police Station, and called “I am at our house, I am imple, I am son, and I am son.” On the other hand, the Defendant prevented the Defendant, who the said police officer attempted to go to go to his spouse, and thereby, threatened the police officer with the escape of the police officer, spathing the bridge of the police officer, and drinking.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the handling of domestic violence reports, and at the same time, the above victim, who is a police officer, went on a right slot box that requires medical treatment for about 10 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation to D on the 112 Report Report Report List of the Police Agency (the body photo of the victim);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties is serious crimes detrimental to the function of the State by nullifying a legitimate exercise of public authority, and there is a need for strict punishment, and the quality of such crimes is not good.

In addition, the fact that the defendant has been punished for the same crime of violence is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, it appears that the defendant shows the attitude of recognizing and opposing his mistake, that the degree of injury is not significant, that there is no criminal record exceeding the fine for the defendant, and that there is no other criminal record, the age, occupation, character, personality and conduct, family relationship, living environment, background leading to the crime, etc.