A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2017. 6. 25. 02:40 경 용인시 기흥구 C에 있는 D 주점에서 그 곳 업주인 E로부터 ‘ 손님이 물건을 때려 부순다’ 는 내용의 112 신고를 받고 현장에 출동한 용인 동부 경찰서 F 지구대 소속 경찰관 G, H, I가 신고 내용 및 피고 인의 인적 사항을 확인한 후 귀가할 것을 요구하였다는 이유로, 위 경찰관들에게 “ 좃도 아닌 경찰관 새끼들이 이래라

Jinra

(h) 7 or 10 persons who were going to the Seoul detention center;

In the case of the Si gue, several gue gugue ma

나하고 맞짱 뜰까.

좃도 아닌 새끼들이 지랄이야.

“In doing a bath, the chest part of H was tightly sealed once, G was frightened with his clothes and portable phone, sold at hand once, and frightened with I’s chest part by hand once, and frighted with her finger.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the handling of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement by a witness G, I and J;

1. Each police statement made to G, H, I, E, and J;

1. A report on investigation;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment on the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (no person in special sentencing) shall interfere with the performance of public duties;

2. The fact that the Defendant’s decision on the sentence interfered with the execution of official duties in the state of detention and the nature of the offense is not good, there are a number of criminal records, and there are the same criminal records such as interference with the performance of official duties and violence, and there is a lack of reflectiveness against his mistake.