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

On August 20, 2019, at around 03:04, the Defendant: (a) received a report on the suspicion of drunk driving and received a request for a drinking test from E, a police box affiliated with the Pocheon Police Station D, which called the Defendant.

The Defendant did not properly measure it due to bad drinking, such as short drinking, etc., and was requested to measure the re-driving from the above E, and caused the E’s chest to have been sealed twice as a finger, on the ground that the Defendant was a bad drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the crackdown on drinking driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. Investigation report (Analysis of CCTVs at the control site, and images taken by police officers dispatched at the time);

1. Application of damaged photographs, cinematographic extract photographs, and relevant film CD-related statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the "justifiable circumstances") of the suspended sentence;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to five years;

2. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of types] that the person concerned has no obstruction of the performance of official duties or coercion (type 1) (the scope of recommending punishment] (the scope of recommending punishment), six months to one year and six months (basic area).

3. The Defendant, who was sentenced to a fine twice due to drinking driving in the past, once again was punished by a fine, and was required to take a drinking test by a police officer, followed the act of spitation, such as spitation, etc. in a short manner. Furthermore, the Defendant committed an assault, such as spitation, etc. of the police officer’s chest by hand, and the nature of the offense is considerably poor in light of the circumstances, method and form of the offense.

Since then, the damaged police officer entered the inspection team in the process of arresting the defendant.

Such light of public power is eventually shaking the foundation of social order, and is seriously dangerous to the safety of the general public.