On April 25, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor by the Incheon District Court for the obstruction of the performance of official duties, and on June 11, 2014, the Defendant was a person with a majority of the criminal records of the same kind.

The Defendant, at around 23:15 on October 11, 2016, 2016, expressed a 7 complex in Gangseo-gu, Gangseo-gu, Seoul Hubro 209 (Serodong), “no passenger does locked in the taxi,” and the D police officer affiliated with the Seoul Gangseo-gu Seoul Police Station C police station, which called upon 112, takes a bath to the Defendant, such as “Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie, Ie that I am at the taxi, and added the above D border, as I am, I am on the back.

E Violenced with face of a policeman by hand.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers regarding the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F or D;

1. Classical photographs of the police officer;

1. Previous convictions of judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (the application of repeated crimes and attachment of the same criminal records);

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes provides for the same criminal records, including the crime of obstructing the execution of official duties and damaging public goods, which have been punished six times, and there are many criminal records related to violence. The crime of this case is a serious punishment in light of the fact that it is a crime during the period of repeated crimes of the same kind.

Provided, That the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of the fact that the defendant supports his/her wife and age awareness, the fact that the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime, and other circumstances, such as the background of the crime, the means and result of the crime, etc.