A Imprisonment with prison labor for six months and for four months, respectively.

provided that this ruling has become final and conclusive.

1. At around 05:10 on March 31, 2019, Defendant A expressed a 112-report that he/she was assaulted on the road in front of Busan Western-gu, Busan, and was asked to verify his/her identity from E (33 years of age) who was dispatched to the site by the police officer of the Busan Hagu Police Station D District Unit of the Busan Hagu Police Station (hereinafter referred to as "the police officer of the Republic of Korea") who was requested to confirm his/her identity, and “the head of the spati, why he/she is within the identification card,” and assaulted the Defendant, i.e., attempting to go off for E on the ground of drinking.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

2. Defendant B’s aforementioned date, at the same time, and at the same place as above, the Defendant: (a) obstructed that Party B attempted to arrest Party B as a flagrant offender for the suspicion of obstruction of performance of official duties; (b) obstructed Party B’s arms with G’s arms, and forced Party B’s patrol knife with G’s arms, and the F’s knife with G’s arms to restrain it; and (c) forced Party B’s patrol knife with his hand.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement to F and E;

1. Damage photographs;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on documentary evidence CDs;

1. Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant B of the ordinary concurrence: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendants’ choice of punishment: Imprisonment with prison labor

1. Defendants of suspended execution: The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code is very bad in terms of exercising a direct tangible power on the body of police officers in the process of performing official duties.

Defendant

A has a record of criminal punishment several times, and Defendant B suffered injury to police officers due to the instant crime.

However, the defendants have shown the attitude to recognize and reflect the crime of this case, and the defendant A has no record of being punished in excess of the fine.