A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

At around 22:55 on May 14, 2020, the Defendant was asked to ask the police officer, who is a police officer of the Seocho-gu Police Station F District, to ask him about the circumstances, personal information, etc. of the case, and was arrested as an offender in the act of assault, and was arrested as a flagrant offender of the act of assault, in order to leave the scene by leaving the scene on the 23:07 day after receiving 112 report that “the Defendant committed the assault like the above,” on the front side of the E Union where the above B was in front of the above B, the Defendant was under the influence of 112 report.”

On the other hand, the Defendant assaulted the Defendant, including, but not limited to, a defect that the Defendant tried to board the patrol car, “C. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad. Mad.) on two occasions, and on the same day, he was seated in a shock at the window of Changwon-si, Changwon-si 1, which was located in a shock at the window of Changwon-si. 23:18.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Each investigation report (No. 5, 7, 9) and report on internal investigation (No. 11) on the 112 Report List;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the Defendant was punished for causing bodily injury resulting from the obstruction of performance of special duties even before the instant case, and that there was 16 times criminal records including this, and that the instant crime was committed by assaulting the police officer who duly performed official duties, and the Defendant’s responsibility is bad.

However, the defendant reflects his mistake, and is sentenced to imprisonment in 2015.