Of the facts charged of this case, the prosecution against assault is dismissed.

[Criminal Power] On July 4, 2012, the Defendant sentenced the Suwon District Court to imprisonment with prison labor for the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. and completed the execution of the sentence on September 2, 2013.

【Criminal Facts】

피고인은 2015. 7. 19. 00:10경 수원시 팔달구 C건물에서, 수원중부경찰서 D파출소 소속 경장 E, 순경 F이 G에게 욕설하며 폭행하려는 피고인을 제지하자 “이 씨발놈아, 너도 죽여버린다”라는 등의 욕설을 하며 오른손을 들어 위 E의 얼굴을 때리려 하다가 위 F으로부터 제지당하자, 다시 양 손바닥으로 위 E의 가슴팍을 강하게 1회 밀쳐 폭행하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the investigation of the case and the maintenance of public order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement of E and G;

1. The photo of the parts damaged by the horse E;

1. A criminal investigation report ( CCTV images inside a police box);

1. Previous records: Application of criminal records and other inquiry reports and investigation reports (related to repeated crimes)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders;

1. Where the extent of the balance of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines [Scope of recommendations] is minor in the area of mitigation (one month to eight months) (special mitigation) of the area of obstruction of performance of official duties (special mitigation) / Where the degree of violence, intimidation and deception is minor / same repeated crime of the same kind;

2. Determination of sentence: The defendant, who has been sentenced to five months of imprisonment, committed the crime of this case again during the period of repeated crimes even though he had been sentenced to multiple criminal records of violence and two times of obstruction of performance of official duties, and committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crimes of the same crime; the defendant's failure to receive a letter from the damaged police officer; on the other hand, it seems that the degree of violence was not severe; and on the other hand, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, etc. as shown in the records and arguments of this case, shall