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

On August 23, 2016, at around 23:25, the Defendant threatened C with her eye as if he/she was the head, and threatened C’s face part of C, on the ground that C was discovered as a drunk driving in front of the Shiamamamamamb in the Young-gu, Young-gu, Youngwon Police Station B, which was under the influence of drinking driving, and the head C was exposed to the danger of harm to C’s life or body.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the crackdown on drinking driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to C

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 136 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the following favorable circumstances) threatens and threatens police officers who control drinking.

This is highly responsible as a challenge to the public authority that should be strictly enforced.

On the other hand, the fact of crime is recognized and wrong.

There is a written application from the police officer in question that the police officer will take the front line.

In addition, it is also recognized that there is no past record of criminal punishment, other than fines (one time).

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing as shown in the instant pleadings, a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor shall be imposed on the Defendant.