A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that 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

At around 01:20 on September 17, 2015, the Defendant, at the entrance of the 2 tunnel, who was drinking alcohol while driving the B K7 car and returning home while driving the B K7 car in the city hot spring, was requested by the head D of the Dong Police Station C to take a drinking test and was requested by E of the same police station to cooperate in the preparation of related documents, such as the statement of drinking driver's situation, etc., after confirming the 0.142% numerical value as a result of the drinking test, and was requested by E of the same police station to cooperate in the preparation of the relevant documents, such as the statement of drinking driver's situation, etc., on the ground that he was asked to the above police officer E to “whether the above police officer is a criminal suspect or not.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties by police officers on drinking control.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to E, F, and D;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Reasons for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (6 months to one year and four months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (the special person who has been sentenced] [decision of the sentence] The defendant appears to have the attitude of acknowledging and opposing the crime, the degree of obstruction of performance of official duties, and the fact that there are no criminal records of the same kind, etc.