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

On December 5, 2016, at around 00:15, the Defendant: (a) received the Defendant’s false report in front of the “D week” located in the Southern Navy C; and (b) respondeded to the statement of the relevant person; (c) obstructed the Defendant from committing a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act; and (d) obstructed the Defendant’s return to the police box; and (d) committed a serious bath to the F’s chest by carrying out the patrol, and assaulting the Defendant’s chest on five occasions in good hands, while keeping the Defendant’s complaint back to the police box.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties concerning public peace and maintenance of order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement concerning G and F;

1. Five copies of a statement of handling reported 112 cases reported by the person under consideration to 112;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes for reporting internal accidents;

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

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria [Scope of the recommended punishment] and interference with the execution of public duties, the mitigated area (one month to eight months) (a person who interferes with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) (a person who has been specially mitigated) is not subject to punishment;

2. The crime of interference with the performance of official duties, such as this case, is not good in that it seriously undermines the pride and desire of the victimized police officers to work, and eventually causes damage to the general public.

In particular, it is true that there is a great need to punish the defendant in light of the circumstances where the defendant exercised violence against the police officer or the contents of violence.

However, the suspension of execution shall be imposed only once by taking into account the above circumstances, taking into account the fact that the defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine, etc., because the defendant was late against his mistake and received a letter from the damaged police officer.