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

Punishment of the crime

around 23:55 on November 22, 2015, the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender under the charge of assault against D, an acting driver on the front side of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and was transferred to the office for integrated investigation of the Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station at approximately 00:10 on the 23th day of the same month, Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and the Defendant was transferred to the office for integrated investigation of the Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station at approximately 21:29 on the 29th day of the same month. From around that time to around 03:10 on the same day, he/she would not take a bath and “humshshumshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

D. How much the amount of money is paid.

The police officer called, “I spits money.” On the same day, the police officer assaulted the Defendant, such as spiting, spiting, so far as it is hard to the face of the above E, by facing the above E, facing the process of release to the Defendant around 03:10 on the same day.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties of police officers in criminal cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement ( Copy) with respect to E and F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning CCTV images-fashion photographs;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Imprisonment) of the relevant Article of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to five years; and

2. Application of the sentencing criteria (the scope of recommendations) (the scope of punishment on July 1, 2015) (the scope of recommendations) (the scope of interference with the performance of public duties and the coercion of duties) in the basic area (the period from June to April) (the period from June to April)

3. The crime of interference with the execution of official duties of the Defendant was committed in the course of being arrested and released as a assault case, and spiting down the nature of the Defendant, so far as possible, in light of the law and form of the crime. In light of the act of the Defendant before and after the crime of this case, the police authority of the Defendant and the overall judicial system are very serious, and the Defendant was punished for the crime of violence, etc. before and after the crime.