A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On November 1, 2019, at around 22:37, the Defendant stopped the front part of the Cdong in Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, by drinking control, while driving D RT125 Orala. At this point, when the victim F, who was working for drinking control, demanded the Defendant to stop and stop the Oralatob, the Defendant was driving on the road in front of DR125 Orala, and the Defendant was faced with the victim’s legs and other unclear parts under the direction that the victim F, who was working for drinking control, was on the part of the Daegu Central Police Station E, which was a dangerous object to avoid drinking control, leading the victim to the right side of the Oraltoba, leading the victim to getting on and off the above Orala, which is a dangerous object to avoid drinking control.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on drinking control, thereby causing the injury of the victim who is a police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Criminal tools, photographs of the upper part and upper part of the body, and medical certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (the place of work, the injured part and the stophography of the skin), investigation report (the submission of a diagnosis report by a victim);

1. The first sentence of Article 144 (2) and Articles 144 (1) and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter the following grounds for sentencing)

1. The gist of the assertion was that the Defendant, while the Defendant was crypted to demand a police officer to take a drinking test and attempted to take a drinking test by immediately leaving out of the police officer’s demand for a drinking test, he stopped, and in the process, crypted by cumba in the process, cumba, and did not intentionally interfere with the police officer’s performance of his duties.

2. Determination

A. The other party's intent in relation to the obstruction of performance of official duties is to perform his duties.