On January 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) committed assault on the part of the Defendant, on the part of the convenience stores located in the Gumi-si Si, on January 13:34, 2017; (b) on the part of the Defendant, the police officers, etc., who were called up after receiving a report on an act of vision, directed the Defendant of the situation; (c) the police officers, etc., who were called up after having been called up for the act of vision; (d) the instant police officers, etc., sent to the Gumi Police Station D’s police box, who were able to take a look at the situation; and

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of order of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (as to attachment of photographs);

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Articles 10(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate mental and physical weakness;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria [Scope of the recommended punishment] When the scope of the special mitigation area (one month to eight months) (special mitigation person), the degree of violence, intimidation, deceptive scheme, or interference with public duties is insignificant, mental and physical weakness are insignificant;

2. The Defendant rendered a sentence of sentence and obstructed the performance of official duties by carrying out a police officer who was called out after receiving a report while taking a desire for a vehicle and a person driving the vehicle.

The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime, and was under suspension of execution, and committed the instant crime only for two months and in the absence of imprisonment with prison labor.

However, the defendant reflects the crime of this case.

The degree of tangible power exercised by the defendant is relatively minor.

The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a state of mental and physical weakness at the time, as a person who was diagnosed as an alcoholic respect or a depression and was able to receive a mental and physical therapy.

In the above circumstances, the punishment shall be determined as per Disposition by comprehensively taking into account all the conditions of sentencing, including the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime.