2.Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

On July 30, 2017, at around 11:29, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the subway platform in Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu, 200, and the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, and, upon receiving a report of 112 from the subway, recommended the Defendant to return home by the border C belonging to the Seoul Mapo Police Station B of Mapo-gu, Seoul, Mapo Police Station, who was called by the Defendant, the Defendant: “I am home,” and “I am under the influence of a police officer.” However, according to the evidence, I think that the Defendant was under the influence of the following facts.

As a result, assaulting C on three occasions, hand, etc., on one occasion, and intending to cover plastic bags with C head.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning 112 reporting handling duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on mobile phone images;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

2. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following sentencing shall be considered as favorable circumstances, etc. in consideration of the importance of sentencing):

3. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 62-2(1) of the Order to Attend the Military Court Act, the Defendant did not part of his or her memory

The records of this case show that the defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of the crime, but it does not seem that the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

Reasons for sentencing

1. The sentencing guidelines are recommended: Where the degree of interference with public duties is minor, such as assault, intimidation, deceptive scheme, or obstruction of public duties in the mitigated area (one month or August) of Class 1 (Obstruction of Performance of Public Duties and Forced Performance of Duties) (Special Mitigation Persons) (Special Mitigation Persons).

1. Unfavorable circumstances: This is applicable;