However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

피고인은 2018. 4. 25. 19:52 경 파주시 C에 있는 ‘D’ 라는 상호의 식당 앞길에서, 손님이 소란을 피운다는 112 신고를 받고 출동한 경기 파주 경찰서 E 지구대 소속 경장인 F으로부터 귀가할 것을 권유 받자 화가 나, “ 이 썅놈의 새끼야, 어디서 거짓말을 치냐,

C. He saw that he she was able to read “the f.................................................

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reports and the prevention of crimes by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to images (ROMs) that interfere with the performance of official duties by the 1st criminal investigation report (J telephone conversations at a wooden D cafeteria);

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

1. Application of the sentencing guidelines for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [Scope of Recommendation] The decision that there is no person in charge of performing official duties in the basic area (from June 1 to June 1) (no person in charge of special sentencing] of Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution. In order to establish the legal order of the State in the period of suspension of execution in six months and to eradicate the danger of public power, it is necessary to have a strict degree of interference with the crime of interfering with the execution of official duties.

Due to the Defendant’s continued abusive theory, it seems that the insult of the victimized police officer was reasonable.

Before committing the instant crime, the Defendant has been punished several times by a fine, such as a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and a violation of duties.

However, the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflected his mistake.

It seems that the degree of violence seems to be serious, and it was not always the damaged police officer's location.

The Defendant deposited KRW 500,00 for the damaged police officers.

There are no criminal records of the same kind.

In addition, the circumstances of the crime of this case, the defendant's age, sex, living environment, and after the crime.