The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On January 17, 2018, the Defendant, at the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu, filed a 112 report stating “A person who takes charge of the main duty,” and received a solicitation to return home from the slopeF belonging to the Seoul Western Police Station Epis, the police officer, and the police officer G at the scene, who took a bath to the police officer, and committed assault, such as taking a single price at which the F F’s son’s son was cut off, thereby obstructing the police officer’s legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the report.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. A investigation report (as to attachment of a mobile phone image file), and a set: The application of each Act or subordinate statute to a mobile phone image CD;

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. A fine of three million won to be imposed on the person under the suspension of sentence;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act (one-day conversion amount: 100,000 won);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Sentence (the defendant reflects his mistake and is the first offender, there are circumstances to be taken into account the background of the crime of this case, the defendant's death with the death of the injured police officer, and the defendant was designated as a person eligible for State veterans' compensation) of the Criminal Code and his defense counsel's assertion on the defendant and his defense counsel. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that at the time of the crime of this case, the defendant was in a physical and mental state due to drinking by the defendant at the time of the crime of this case.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the Defendant and the video of the cellular phone taken at the time of the instant crime, it is recognized that the Defendant was in a certain state of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and that the Defendant was able to bring about side effects on a new mental boundary, such as the evidence of taking clothes before the commission of the crime, even if he was aware of the fact that the Defendant was taking advantage of the nature of the instant crime, which can be known by each evidence of the judgment, and the background of the instant crime.