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

At around 07:50 on June 15, 2019, the Defendant: (a) expressed his desire to the police officer who received a request from C (Namnam, 28 years old) (a police officer belonging to the Daejeon Police Station B District of Daejeon, who was dispatched to the site after receiving a report from 112 that he was frighting to a fright; and (b) expressed his desire to “I am home soon after having come home, I am home, I am home, I am home, I am going home, I am going home, I am.”; and (c) assaulted the victim’s neck by hand.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on public peace and maintenance of order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to C

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

1. Grounds for aggravated punishment for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act: The instant crime of obstruction of performance of official duties committed against a certain police officer needs to be strictly punished for a crime detrimental to the function of the State by nullifying the legitimate exercise of public authority, and the degree of tangible force exercised against a victimized police officer cannot be deemed to be minor.

Reasons for mitigation: Considering that it is a relatively minor assault related to the performance of official duties, and that it is not subject to criminal punishment exceeding the fine;