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

피고인은 2017. 12. 18. 04:21경 대구 달서구 B에 있는 C 앞 노상에서 ‘술 취한 행인이 바닥에 누워있다.’라는 취지의 112신고를 받고 출동한 대구성서경찰서 D파출소 소속 경장 E이 피고인을 일으킨 후 인적사항을 확인하려고 하자 갑자기 오른 주먹으로 위 경찰관의 얼굴 부위를 1회 때리고, 계속하여 같은 날 05:00경 대구 달서구 F 노상에서 피고인의 주거지를 찾고 있던 위 경찰관의 다리 부위를 왼발로 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the prevention and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (a copy of the 112 Report Handling List), investigation report (a copy of the service log of a police box) shall apply;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor concerning the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant’s use of violence against the police in the course of performing official duties is not less than that of such act, the Defendant has been punished for violence-related crimes, and the Defendant’s failure to faithfully engage in the instant trial is an element for sentencing unfavorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, it seems that the defendant is against the time of committing the instant crime, and that there is no record that the defendant has been punished for the obstruction of performance of official duties or has been punished for more than suspended execution, etc. are factors for sentencing favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and result of the crime, and all the circumstances constituting the conditions for the punishment as shown in the argument of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered.