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

피고인은 2019. 9. 12. 23:30경 원주시 B에 있는 'C' 앞 노상에서 술에 취하여 길가에 누워 있던 중 이와 관련된 112신고를 받고 출동한 원주경찰서 D지구대 소속 경사 E가 피고인을 깨워 귀가 할 것을 권유하자 순간적으로 화가 나, “왜 날 건드려. 너희들이 시민을 보호하는 사람이야 내가 뭘 잘못했어. 손주새끼들 밖에 안 되는 새끼들이.”라고 큰 소리로 욕설을 하며 E의 좌측 안면 부위를 피고인의 머리로 1회 들이받았다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made by the police officer with respect to F;

1. Damage photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (to attach field video CDs);

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one month to five years;

2. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of type] the obstruction of performance of official duties [Type 1]/ the obstruction of performance of official duties [the scope of recommendations and recommendations] there is no person subject to the coercion of official duties] (the scope of recommendations and recommendations] basic area, six months to one year and six months.

3. Determination of sentence: In addition to the sentencing factors seen earlier, the Defendant suffered bodily violence from the victimized police officers to the extent that the victimized police officers suffered bodily injury with the inside of the mouth, and the nature of the instant crime is heavy.

However, the fact that the defendant is recognized to commit the crime in this case, the crime in this case seems to have occurred contingent, and the fact that the defendant has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime is considered as favorable circumstances. In addition, the sentencing specified in the arguments in this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc.