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

On May 7, 2014, at around 00:40 on May 7, 2014, the Defendant expressed that he assaulted D (the age of 48) who is a taxi engineer due to taxi fares in front of the Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, which was a police officer belonging to the Incheon Southern Police Station E-gu, Incheon, and that he was a police officer, who was a police officer belonging to the Incheonnam Police Station E-gu, and that he was “the boms who were discharged” to the above police officers, and carried the boms of F by hand, and carried the boms of G police officers on two occasions.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers for handling 112 reports and maintaining public order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D, F and G;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. Where the extent of the punishment for the obstruction of performance of official duties is minor, such as the scope of the punishment for the obstruction of performance of official duties (in January or August), the area of mitigation (special mitigation) (in January or August), the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme;

2. Determination of sentence of this case as to the crime of this case is not suitable for the nature of the crime, but is against the above special mitigation and reflect, there is no significant penalty power exceeding the fine, and other various factors of sentencing, including the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant, shall be determined in consideration of the punishment.

Public Prosecution Rejection Parts

1. Around 00:40 on May 7, 2014, the Defendant: (a) committed assault against D (48 years of age) who was a taxi engineer at the front line of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, on the ground that he brought about the Defendant’s cell phone, which was placed in this cab, and (b) demanded 7,000 won of taxi fees, while taking a bath for the victim on the ground that he was able to demand 7,00 won of taxi fees; (c) committed assault on the part of the victim by putting a breabbbbb, and fla

2. Judgment: Subparagraph 2 of Article 327 of the Criminal Procedure Act (Indication of the victim's intention not to punish the victim on May 7, 2014 before the institution of public prosecution is filed);