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

On June 18, 2020, at around 15:40, the Defendant reported 112 to the Daejeon Dong-gu B, that “A drinking person is unable to carry on his business as he frighting,” and requested the above E to return home from the slope E belonging to the Daejeon Dong Police Station D District, Daejeon Police Station, which called “a drinking person is unable to carry on his business as he frighting,” and assaulted the chest part of the above E on two occasions on his head.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. The punishment shall be determined as per the disposition, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the crime related to the act of violence with the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act, in spite of the past seven times of punishment; (b) another person repeats the same mistake; (c) the absence of tolerance from the police officer; (d) the unfavorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime; and (e) other favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime;