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

On July 1, 2014, at around 23:40, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the front side of Daegu-gun, and was recommended by the Defendant to fasten and return home from the victim D (year 47) who is a police officer belonging to the Daegu Haak Police Station C police box called the Defendant, “I am, I am son, I am son, I am son, I am son, I am son, I am son, I am son, I am son, I am son, and I am the victim’s right side inside the right side of the victim’s right side, so I am am the victim not string up for about two weeks of medical treatment.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on protective measures, and at the same time, the defendant inflicted on police officers about two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Four copies of the photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (the crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties and the crimes of injury, and the punishment imposed on the crimes of serious injury);

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is a case where the defendant, who was under the influence of alcohol and was able to take measures for returning home after being reported so that he was under the influence of alcohol, and thereby obstructing the execution of official duties by causing an injury to the police officer, and thus, the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case with the attitude of disregarding the exercise of legitimate public authority. Thus, there is a need for punishment corresponding thereto.

However, the defendant recognized the crime and expressed his intention that the police officer who is the victim does not want to punish the defendant, and the defendant is related to violence before the case.