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

피고인은 2014. 7. 2. 02:40경 서울 서대문구 홍제천로 118 삼일중앙교회 앞 노상에서 주취자가 교회 문을 계속 흔든다는 112신고를 받고 출동한 서울서대문경찰서 C파출소 소속 경사 D이 피고인에게 그만하고 귀가하라고 하자 위 D에게 “이 씹할 놈의 새끼들이, 너는 뭐야, 씹할 새끼야, 이런 짭새 새끼가. 어린 놈의 새끼들이”라며 발로 위 D의 허벅지 부분을 차고, 주먹으로 팔 부분을 때리고, 조끼를 잡아 당겨 경찰공무원의 112신고 처리에 관한 정당한 직무집행을 방해하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. E statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as work log and photographs of damaged parts;

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 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Du1164, Apr. 1

1. The Defendant’s assertion and judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Probation, etc. Act, and Article 62-2(1) of the same Act, and Article 59 of the same Act on Probation, etc., argued that the Defendant was under the state of mental and physical disability as he was under the influence of alcohol when committing the instant crime. As such, according to the above macroscopic evidence, the Defendant was taking a proscopic drug at the time of committing the instant crime, and the Defendant was aware of drinking on the day of the instant case, but it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, thereby, it

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.