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

1. On July 24, 2016, around 01:30 on July 24, 2016, the Defendant assaulted the victim’s chest part of his chest by drinking alcohol together with the victim, who was refused after drinking alcohol by the victim D (the age of 38) operated by the victim D (the age of 38) in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu.

2. The Defendant: (a) expressed his desire to refrain from assaulting D from the horse F and G belonging to the Seoul Gangnam Police Station, which was dispatched to the site as a static tea by receiving a report of 112 at the time, place, and on the ground that he was demanded to produce an identification card; and (b) assaulted on one occasion the face of the border F with his left hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Statement of each police statement made to F and D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

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

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant's assertion of mental disorder as to the suspended execution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code (see, e.g., favorable circumstances as seen below) is alleged to have been in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder due to drinking, galuling, depression, etc. at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, according to the records, the fact that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime of this case and was suffering from polar dynamic disorder, etc., is recognized, but there was no ability to discern things or make decisions.

Since it cannot be deemed that there was a state or weak, the above assertion is rejected.

The circumstances that are disadvantageous to the reason for sentencing are identical to the same crime.