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 August 11, 2017, at around 01:10, the Defendant: (a) sought a report from the head office in front of the C main office in Busan Northern District B to provide support to transfer a person under the influence of alcohol to the hospital; and (b) knew that the circumstances surrounding the D District of the Busan Northern Police Station D branch in the Busan Northern Police Station exceeded the stairs of the said C branch office, and the Defendant’s driving of the Defendant, who attempted to move the Defendant’s driving to the 119 first-class police station, led to the Defendant’s driving of the said E on his hand, and led the Defendant’s driving to the police station.

The Defendant continued to stop carrying the Defendant’s 119 first-aid vehicle, thereby blocking the front of the said patrol vehicle in order to take and move the patrol vehicle, and preventing the police from carrying approximately 20 minutes of the patrol vehicle while “I must go to this son,” and blocking the movement of the patrol vehicle between approximately 20 minutes.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the protection of the people's body and public peace.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to E and F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (Attachment to photographs of suspect for committing the crime);

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

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

1. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended sentence] the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (the interference with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) of the first type (the interference with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) is nonexistent;

2. The punishment imposed on the police who has committed violence against the police officer who performs public duties by taking advantage of the power of conviction is not good that it impedes the exercise of legitimate public authority that should be strictly executed, and the defendant has the record of having been punished several times for violent crimes;

However, the defendant shows the attitude to recognize and reflect the crime of this case.

The degree of violence seems to be relatively minor under the influence of alcohol.

In addition, the defendant's age, sex, environment, and this case.