However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On April 5, 2017, at around 02:40, the Defendant: (a) recommended several times to return home from D who was dispatched to the site after receiving a report from the police officer belonging to the Seoul Western Police Station C District of Gangseo-gu, Seoul, to the effect that “I am home from D who was dispatched to the site,” and without complying with it, the Defendant “I am knick knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife.”

“Along with sound, assaulted the chest of the above D on two occasions by drinking.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of order, such as handling of 112 reported cases by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

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

2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the types of decisions] that interfere with the performance of official duties and the coercion (one type] of a crime interfering with the performance of official duties (the area of recommendation and the scope of the recommended punishment], the basic area of the recommendation and the scope of the recommended punishment], six months to one year and six months.

3. There is no reason for the suspension of execution [major reasons for consideration] (general reasons): positive social ties clear, serious reflective, and the detention of the defendant's family members in excessive difficulty.

4. The act of assaulting a police officer performing official duties, such as the instant crime of this case, and obstructing the performance of official duties, is not against the nature of the crime. However, the Defendant’s confession and reflects his mistake in depth, although the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the juvenile, it appears that he had faithfully lived without the criminal history, support the wife and the child for which four months have passed since he became an adult, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and changes theory are considered.