A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three months.

Punishment of the crime

On August 28, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and two months for obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. in the Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court on September 20, 2014 and completed the execution of the above sentence on September 20, 2014. On December 23:3:35, 2014, the Defendant sent to the site after receiving a report from 112 that the Defendant was satisfing in the Dar Art located in Boan-si, Boan Police Station Emba, and the police officer G sent to the site on the ground that the Defendant was prevented the Defendant, and the Defendant was able to take the face of the above G on the ground that the F Party was sent to the site on the ground that the police officer F of the Haan Police Station Emba, a police officer G, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression, investigation, etc. of the above F on one occasion

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A report on investigation;

1. A complaint;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal records, and replys to inquiries, investigation reports by individual, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes attached to the acceptance status;

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

1. The reason for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes is that the defendant has already been punished for violent crimes 24 times, and among them, it appears that he was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor in consideration of the fact that he was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties and was released from prison six times in total due to the crime of obstruction of official duties, etc., and that he was not able to commit the crime of obstruction of official duties, and that the defendant did not take any measures to recover the damage of the damaged police officer, and that the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case even after he was arrested in the earth due to the crime of this case, and that the situation after the crime of this case seems to have been significantly poor, and that the damaged police officer also complained of a severe punishment against the defendant. However, in determining the term of imprisonment, the defendant is led to the crime of this case.