A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. 피고인은 2017. 6. 14. 00:10 경 창원시 마산 합포구 월포동에 있는 소방 정대 맞은편 도로에서 술에 취해 음주 운전 단속을 하는 경찰관들에게 다가가 시비를 걸고, 도로 가운데로 걸어 나가다가 경찰관들 로부터 제지 당하고 경남 마산 중부 경찰서 C과 소속 경위 D으로부터 귀가할 것을 요구 받자 화가 나, “ 내가 돈이 없는데 그럼 백차를 태워 줘! 씹할 놈들 너희가 경찰이 가 모가지를 따 버릴라!

“The bath theory is called “,” and as such, the breath was flaped with pulse and flap as can be flaped.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention and suppression of the above D's crime that wear police uniforms.

2. 피고인은 2017. 6. 14. 01:40 경 창원시 마산 합포구 3.15대로 147에 있는 위 경남 마산 중부 경찰서 E과 사무실에서 위와 같은 이유로 체포되어 인치되어 있던 중, 체포 통지를 하던 위 경찰서 E과 소속 순경 F에게 욕설을 하며 몸으로 위 F를 밀치고 발로 위 F의 왼쪽 다리 부위를 2회, 낭 심 부위를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention and suppression of the above FF crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. On-site photographs (the Defendant asserted that he was in a mental and physical loss or mental weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated, even though the defendant was aware of drinking at the time of committing the crime, considering the circumstances such as the background and mode of the crime in this case, the defendant's speech and behavior after the arrest of the flagrant offender, it cannot be deemed that the defendant did not have or lacks ability to make a decision on the right and wrong due to such circumstance. Thus, the above argument is rejected.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Act concerning facts constituting an offense;