A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, 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

1. On July 27, 2013, around 23:30 on July 27, 2013, the Defendant was placed on the street in front of the D Elementary School located in Pyeongtaek-si C, and the Defendant was placed under the control of E in the Gyeonggi-gu Police Station where he was carrying out the patrol while driving away from his nameless women.

피고인은 위 E이 여성을 쫓아가는 이유에 대해 묻자 “짭새 새끼들아 뒤져볼래, 죽는다”라고 욕설을 하고, 오른 주먹으로 E의 얼굴을 3회에 걸쳐 때릴 듯이 위협하고, E이 손을 들어 막자 왼손으로 E의 가슴을 1회 밀쳐 폭행하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the control of crimes.

2. On July 28, 2013, around 01:20, the Defendant assaulted a police officer’s duty clothes removed, etc. with a defect in order for F to have the Defendant enter the custody room after checking the body of the Defendant at the Pyeongtaek-si Police Station detention room located in Pyeongtaek-si Police Station located in Pyeongtaek-dong, Pyeongtaek-dong, 619.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of the arrested person in the detention room of the police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the respective Acts and subordinate statutes of E and F;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental retardation under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, according to the above evidence, the defendant was found to have drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make a decision, even though he was found to have drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case.

Since it seems that it did not seem to have reached a state or weak, the above.