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

At around 06:30 on August 19, 2014, the Defendant, at the main point of “C” located in “C” in “C, who was under influence of alcohol, was solicited to return home from E by the chief of the police station affiliated with the police box of the Speaker Police Station called up upon receiving a report, and took a bath to the above E, and obstructed the Defendant’s legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of police officers’ faces by drinking once.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] No person who has no basic area (6-1-1-4 months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties [decision of sentence] Imprisonment with prison labor, six months of suspended sentence, two years of probation, 80 hours of community service, Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties by assaulting police officers, and Defendant has several penalties power due to violence, etc. even before the instant case, under unfavorable circumstances, the Defendant is against the recognition of the crime of this case, and the fact that the police officers who committed the assault did not face injury shall be considered as favorable circumstances. The punishment shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the method and result of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the age of the Defendant, character and conduct, family environment, etc.