1. On January 15, 2015, at around 22:50 on January 15, 2015, the Defendant: (a) explained the circumstances of the instant case to the police officers affiliated with the said police box, the Defendant carried the victim DNA (63) who was driven in the alley near the alley line located in B, which was located in the police box, and carried the victim’s face at one time, and carried the victim’s d’s ethmp. by hand.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted victims respectively.

2. 공무집행 방해 피고인은 제 1 항 기재 일시ㆍ장소에서 위 폭행을 목격한 위 파출소 소속 경찰관 F 경위로부터 현행범인 체포를 당하게 되자 이에 저항하면서 발로 위 F의 낭 심 부위를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders of the above F, a police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of the provisions of 19 Acts and subordinate statutes to the defendant of the police interrogation protocol E, D, and F of each police statement protocol to obstruct the performance of official duties in the police statement protocol, and to the CCTV closure photograph 19 to the defendant;

1. Relevant Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence, the choice of imprisonment), and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Article 37 (former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Pronouncement of Punishment in consideration of the fact that the accused has the same criminal history, that the victims have not received correspondence from the victims, and that the whereabouts of the accused has not been unknown and thus the case has not been present in the trial);