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

On September 23, 2020, the Defendant: (a) committed an assault by the police officer E belonging to the D District Police Station D District Zone D District District, called the Defendant to pay money and return home to the Defendant without calculating at C Convenience points located in Maitius B, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the said E-W report case.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The application of the police protocol of statement to E, damage photographs, and the Acts and subordinate statutes governing crime scene photographs;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

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

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to five years;

2. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of types] of the obstruction of performance of official duties: [Type 1] There is no obstruction of performance of official duties or coercion of official duties (special person] (the scope of the recommended area and the recommended punishment] basic area, six months to one year and six months of imprisonment.

3. Determination of sentence shall be made within the scope of the sentencing criteria, taking full account of the following circumstances as well as the various circumstances on which the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the crime.

It is necessary to strictly punish the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties which interferes with the legitimate exercise of public authority, and thus undermines the function of the state.

However, the defendant took a bath to a police officer who was dispatched to restrain the defendant from disturbing drinking alcohol, and uses violence such as breathing breaths. In light of the circumstances of the crime, the attitude of the act, etc., the nature of the defendant is not very good.

The damaged police officers did not receive any tolerance from the police officers.

There are several records of criminal punishment, including the suspension of imprisonment with labor, for violent crimes.