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

Around 19:40 on September 11, 2016, the Defendant was divingd at the rear seat of the CA car parked in the front seat of Pyeongtaek-si, which was reported to him by 112 and sent to the said seat, and the head of Pyeongtaek-gu Police Station D's Gyeong-gu Police Station, who was sent to the said seat, expressed the Defendant’s desire to read “a Chewing drinking only......” The above E is a police officer, notified that he is a police officer, and then then pushed the E’s body through his body and then pushed the Defendant again, “I must see................” The Defendant took care of the face of the said E’s face by drinking.

Accordingly, the Defendant assaulted police officers who were performing legitimate duties concerning the prevention of crimes and the handling of 112 reported cases, thereby obstructing the execution of official duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant Article 13 (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. The crime of assaulting a police officer is heavier than that of the crime by observing the protection and observation, and by spreading the grounds for sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order.

However, in consideration of the circumstances, such as the fact that the crime is divided, contingent crimes, the degree of violence used by police officers is not strong, the police officers who have been assaulted want the defendant's wife, the fact that the police officers are living in the workplace, etc., the sentence shall be determined like the order.