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

The defendant fighting on September 21, 2014 and on September 17:15, 2014, is married in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B underground 2.

아내를 폭행한다는 신고를 받고 출동한 송파경찰서 C지구대 소속 경위 D이 피고인에게 피의사실의 요지, 진술거부권, 변호인 선임권을 고지하고 피고인을 현행범으로 체포하려 하자 갑자기 욕설을 하며 D의 얼굴에 수회 침을 뱉고 손으로 멱살을 1회 잡고 발로 허벅지를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of report by the police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

1. The fact that the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds of the suspended sentence is not weak in light of the form, method, etc. of the crime in this case is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the Defendant is recognizing and opposing the instant crime, that there is no history of criminal punishment other than being subject to punishment, and that the Defendant suffers from a disease such as “other mental and behavioral disorder by alcohol use,” is favorable to the Defendant.

In this context, all the sentencing conditions, including the circumstances after the crime, age, character and conduct, family environment, etc., shall be determined as per the order.