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 July 7, 2017, at around 01:20, the Defendant: (a) reported that he/she had a frymous and fleded in “C Branch” located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon; and (b) reported that he/she had taken a frymous and escaped; (c) the circumstances belonging to the Incheon Bupyeong Police Station D District Unit; and (d) the police officer and scientific investigators performed on-site identification work; and (d) the Defendant reported that he/she had taken a frymous and escaped from the frym

n Doz. 20

The report shall be made by the reporter.

C. The words "I am out", "I am into, and attempt to enter into, the bill, and I see that E enters the Defendant, and I see that I am as follows: "I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I am."

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties concerning criminal investigations.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of victims;

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 stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including observation of protection and community service order;

1. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended sentence] the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (the interference with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) of the first type (the interference with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) is nonexistent;

2. The crime of this case, which was determined to be sentenced, ought to be strictly punished for a crime interfering with the functions of the State and public institutions, and the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, exercised trial expenses or tangible power to police officers in charge of investigation duties, and the degree of tangible force of exercising such power is relatively more severe, and the damage suffered by police officers is not much compensated, damage is not recovered or agreed, and there is a history of having been punished several times due to the use of violence, etc., which appears to be contrary to the unfavorable circumstances, and is punished for the same kind of crime.