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

피고인은 2015. 8. 24. 23:10경 서울 마포구 B에 있는 C 음식점 앞길에서, ‘피고인이 술에 취해 지나가는 마을버스의 사이드 미러를 부수었다.’는 112신고를 받고 출동한 서울마포경찰서 D지구대 소속 순경 E이 사건경위에 대해 질문하자 기분이 나쁘다는 이유로, “말을 좃같이 한다, 나 양아치다.”라고 말하며 손으로 E의 목부위를 1회 가격하고, 몸을 밀쳐 넘어뜨려 폭행하였다.

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. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning police statements to E;

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

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances that are considered as the reason for sentencing) of the suspended sentence [the scope of recommendation] The basic area (f.i.e., obstruction of performance of official duties/performance of official duties) (f., June-1 and April) of the obstruction of performance of official duties / [decision of sentence] the defendant is chosen to be sentenced to imprisonment in light of the following: (a) the defendant committed the instant crime that obstructs the execution of official duties by assaulting a police officer who wears uniform without any justifiable reason under the influence of alcohol on one occasion; (b) the defendant reflects his mistake; (c) the degree of the obstruction of performance of official duties is relatively heavy; and (d) the defendant committed the instant crime by drunkly under the influence of alcohol; and (d) the defendant’s age, character, and environment, which are all the conditions for the sentencing of the instant case, with the sentence suspended only once.