A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On August 29, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to five months of imprisonment for the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. at the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court, and completed the execution of the sentence in the Seosung Prison on September 28, 2013.

【Criminal Facts】

On October 21, 2013, at around 21:05, the Defendant was under the influence of the Defendant from the online of the E Hospital located in D on October 9, 2013, and received a report from the hospital staff and the patient, and was dispatched from the slope G belonging to the F Zone of the Siljin Police Station.

The Defendant, upon being asked from the above G, “I am to see why it is the reason why the hospitalized patient would be suffering from disturbance at the hospital in the influence of alcohol”, the Defendant expressed that “I am to see, am to see, to see only the police, I am to see, to see, to swe see, to swe see, to swe see, to swe see, to swe see, to swe see, to swe see, to swe see, to s

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the dispatch of a police officer's criminal report.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of G and H;

1. Photographs;

1. Previouss before judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (reports prior to and after the disposition), and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. The defendant to whom Article 35 of the Criminal Act applies to repeated crime committed assault against a police officer who was called for drinking alcohol and frighting a plaque, and the nature of such crime is serious.

Furthermore, on June 28, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. at the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court, and on August 29, 2013, the Defendant again committed the instant crime despite the lapse of five months after having been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties by the same court on August 29, 2013, and on the other hand, the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though

All the records of this case, such as the background leading up to this case, the age, family relation, and economic situation of the defendant.