A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Punishment of the crime

On February 8, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to three months of imprisonment with prison labor for the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. in the Changwon District Court's Jinju branch, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on July 25, 2012.

On March 12, 2015, the Defendant took one time the face of the victim who continued to wear protective equipment as his hand while avoiding disturbance, such as failing to comply with the order of the correctional officer D to remove CCTVs attached to CCTVs, as the CCTVs were temporarily suspended from 2 correctional institutions, Dong-dong, 2, Dong-dong, which were located in Gyeongbuk-gun, and failing to comply with the order of the correctional officer D to remove CCTVs from the CCTVs.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of the order of prison officers and the management of the facility, and at the same time, the victim has a face face requiring medical treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the preparation of each resignation in D and E;

1. An examination book of protective equipment;

1. Investigation report (Evidence photographs and binding of diagnostic papers);

1. Images of CCTV-recording CDs;

1. Division: Residents and criminal records, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (related court rulings, etc.);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (Punishment on which the punishment is heavier than that of an injury);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes

1. Determination as to the assertion of self-defense

A. The Defendant’s assertion D gave rise to the Defendant’s attack during the process of suppressing the Defendant and taking the two fingers.

Therefore, since the execution of official duties after D is illegal, the defendant's act of assaulting D does not constitute the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties.

In addition, since the defendant inflicted an injury on D in the process of resistance to avoid the state of improper performance of official duties, it constitutes self-defense.