A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On May 1, 2014, around 20:37, the Defendant: (a) completed a private teaching institute with the Defendant’s son in front of the bus stop at the Office of the Gyeonggi-do Office of North Korea; (b) was under the influence of alcohol while waiting for the Defendant’s large-scale son; (c) reported to 112, and subsequently, the police officer called the 112 and used the son to stop her home; (d) at this time, C was called “I am soon,” and her son’s son’s son son’s son’s son’s son son her home, a police officer dispatched after receiving 112, she her home and her her son’s her son was frighted, and her her son was frighted to her, and the Defendant her her son was frighted to her, and her her boomed to the victim, and her her bro over two weeks.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties by police officers on 112 reports, and at the same time injured the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant (a statement to the effect that the defendant was under influence of alcohol and was dispatched to the scene of the police officer at the time);

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Statement of opinion;

1. Application of statutes on photographs of damage;

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;

1. The reason for sentencing [the scope of recommendation sentence is] the aggravated area (6-2 years) of category I (6-2) of ordinary injury (the scope of recommendation sentence] (the aggravated area) of category I (6-2 years) of ordinary injury (a person under special guard). However, according to the statement made by the police officer F, who is the victim of this case, consistent with the criminal facts in this court, and each evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the fact that the defendant assaulted the victimized police officer. Accordingly, the criminal facts in the judgment can be sufficiently recognized, and there is evidence of conviction.]