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

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. On July 9, 2014, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Drivers, Violence, etc.) (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) considered the victim’s clothes when she took the victim’s hand at one time when she took the victim’s seat at the seat of 462 front of the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Office, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwangjin-gu Office”) and demanded the victim to make a U-turn at the seat of the victim without speaking for destination.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim who is a driver of a vehicle in operation.

2. On July 9, 2014, around 05:45, the Defendant: (a) took an inquiry of the instant situation from the police officer F of the Seoul Mine Police Station Embox, who was dispatched after having received 112 reports, and took an inquiry of the instant situation; (b) took a bath to “boxe, Chewing fluor, and fluor, fluor, fluor, fluor, etc., of the said F’s f’s f’s face and knee, etc., with both hand, and assaulted the Defendant on drinking and knee, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the handling of reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Article 5-10 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The defense counsel's assertion on the defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act asserts to the effect that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability at the time of the crime of this case. However, according to the evidence above, the defendant is deemed to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but it does not seem that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or