On January 29, 2016, the Defendant appealed from Seoul Southern District Court for four months as a crime of injury and is currently pending in trial.

At around 20:05 on December 18, 2015, the Defendant: (a) committed assault to the “I” restaurant operated in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G, and (b) obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties regarding the handling of 112 reports by assaulting the Defendant, namely, “I” restaurant affiliated with the J District Team in the Gangseo-gu Police Station, which was called upon receiving 112 reports from other customers, and invited him to return home; and (b) the Defendant expressed to the said K that “I must grow up to go up to go off by the frith of the police and frith of the police frith,” and interfered with the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Inquiry about criminal history and application of investigation reports (related to cases in which the defendant is currently pending in an appellate trial);

1. The relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the grounds for sentencing under Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act for the choice of criminal facts;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to five years; and

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the types of decisions] interference with the performance of official duties and coercion (the type 1) (special sentencing factors): Reduction factors: Where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor (the territory of recommendation and the scope of punishment), mitigation areas, imprisonment with labor for one month or from August.

3. The defendant who has been sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment and a fine for several times for violent crimes, and has been sentenced to four months for the crime of injury as stated in the judgment of the court below and is still pending in the appellate court.

However, in consideration of the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects the crime of this case and the sentencing conditions shown in the records and changes, the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment for 4 months, but the statutory detention is not allowed in consideration of the fact that the defendant is under separate detention.