A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, on January 25, 2016, ordered alcohol at “C” entertainment drinking places located in Hanam-gun B around 23:55 on January 25, 2016, and did not pay the price.

The Defendant, who received a report and recommended the victim E (24) who is a police officer belonging to the police box affiliated with the police box within the police station within the police station where he was called, to return home, paid the alcohol value, and recommended the Defendant to return home, the Defendant “The Defendant is the fluoral building, the fluore gue Ma, the body inside the building, the fluor, the fluor of bitch, the fluor

A. The Chewing impule theory stated that the victim’s breast part was able to drink at one time by drinking the victim’s breast part.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes, and maintenance of order, and at the same time, he saw the victim about two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury) and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances: the observation of protection and the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act;

Unfavorable circumstances: The history of punishment for interference with the performance of official duties is two times, and there are many other records of punishment due to violence, but the crime of this case has been committed.

The favorable circumstances: The crime of this case is against the law.

There is no significant injury to the victim.

For the victim, one million won was deposited.