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

피고인은 2018. 10. 29. 23:00경 창원시 진해구 B 앞 도로에서, ‘취객이 자고 있다’는 내용의 112신고를 받고 출동한 진해경찰서 C파출소 소속 순경 D이 피고인을 깨운다는 이유로 “씨발놈아, 경찰새끼들 다 직이삔다, 개새끼야”라고 욕설을 하며 발로 D의 무릎 부위를 2회 걷어차 폭행하였다.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Investigation report (investigation into the on-site conditions);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged parts;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] / The basic area of the obstruction of performance of official duties (referring to six months to one year and six months of imprisonment) / [decision of sentence] as follows, the sentence shall be determined as per Disposition by comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the contents of the Defendant’s violence, the details and circumstances of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

There is a need to strictly cope with crimes that obstruct the performance of duties by police officers.

The defendant has been punished by a fine in 2014 for the same crime.

The favorable circumstances: The Defendant recognized the instant crime, thereby not repeating the same mistake.