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

피고인은 2018. 11. 6. 18:20경 서울 종로구 B에 있는 ‘C’ 식당 앞에서 노숙인들이 술을 먹고 시끄럽게 한다는 112신고를 받고 출동한 서울종로경찰서 D파출소 소속 순경 E이 술을 먹고 있는 불상의 노숙인들에게 길거리에서 술을 먹지 말고 다른 곳으로 이동하도록 얘기하는 것에 불만을 품고 ‘야 이 짭새 새끼들아 똑바로 처리해라’라고 하며 배로 E의 몸을 밀치고 머리로 콧등을 1회 때려 폭행하였다.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers on the maintenance of public order and peace as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning E and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report ( CCTV image data for crime prevention);

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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. From six months to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor on the sentencing criteria (the basic area of the obstruction of performance of official duties, the category I of the obstruction of performance of official duties);

2. The nature of the crime of this case committed by a police officer who was dispatched to a police officer after drinking alcohol on the street through which the decision-making person on sentence passes is not easy.

Defendant has been punished for the same crime.

However, it appears that it is contingent crime committed in the oral transport, and the defendant has recognized the mistake.

The degree of obstruction of performance of official duties is not obvious.

No defendant shall have been punished by imprisonment with prison labor or more.

The sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the above circumstances.