On April 25, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to five months of imprisonment for the crime of embezzlement at the Jeonju District Court, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on July 14, 2014 at a military prison.

On August 25, 2015, the Defendant was found to have performed drinking on the street in front of the “D” in the following cities: 21:40 on August 25, 2015, while driving the Ero-car, and the Defendant was found to have prevented drinking. The Defendant’s complaint to F in the circumstances where the Doksan Police Station belongs to the Doksan Police Station, “I am you see, even if I am you see,”

"Cather like "", "Watherb", fatd the bat of the F, pushed the bat of the chest, pushed the bat of the chest, and cut the fat one time with the hand floor.

피고 인은 위와 같은 행동으로 인하여 익산경찰서 소속 경위 G으로부터 공무집행 방해 현행 범인으로 체포되면서 바닥에 넘어지자, " 씨 발 놈의 새끼야!" 라는 등 욕설을 하며 위 G의 복부 부위를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the crackdown on drinking alcohol driving and arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement concerning witness F and G;

1. Each police statement made to F and G;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a written reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, personal identification and current status of acceptance by each person;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136 of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act that aggravated concurrent crimes [the scope of recommending punishment] [the grounds for sentencing under Article 38(1)2 and Article 50] [the grounds for obstructing the performance of official duties]] and Article 1 of the Act on Interference with the Execution of Official Duties [the decision of sentencing] [the defendant did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime. The police officers who are victims do not want the punishment of the defendant. However, even though the police officers who are victims do not want the punishment of the defendant, the crime of this case in which the defendant used violence against the police officers who performed official duties do not seem to be weak, the crime of this case is committed during the period of repeated crime.