A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

Criminal facts

On July 11, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for an injury or a assault in the Changwon District Court Msan Branch, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 13, 2018.

At around 17:50 on November 25, 2018, the Defendant: (a) heard the horses, “I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am again, I am again, E and F am, respectively, when I am together, and am off, I am under the influence of I am under the influence of I am, I am under the influence of I am under the influence of I am under the influence of I am under the influence of I am under the influence of I am

As a result, the Defendant assaulted police officers and interfered with their legitimate performance of duties on the handling of reported cases, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement to F and E;

1. Previous convictions: Criminal history records, inquiry reports (in the course of trial records, etc. attached to the judgments, etc. of the case), decisions, printed outs of the Supreme Court's "Search into the case", and the summary agreement auxiliary meetings of the case bound in the public trial records and the application of statutes (Supreme Court Decision 18Do16486)

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (Punishment prescribed for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties against heavier slope E);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The defendant asserts to the effect that the judgment on the argument of the defendant in the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder by stating that he was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder under the influence of alcohol

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the fact that the defendant had drinking at the time of committing the crime can be recognized, but the defendant has the ability to distinguish things or ability to make a decision.