A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six 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 May 11, 2017, the Defendant continued to engage in the activities of de facto marriage C in the front parking lot of the Suwon-gu Seoul metropolitan apartment B, Suwon-si, and, upon receiving the report of C 112 from C, the security guards affiliated with the Suwon-gu Police Station D commander of the Suwon-gu Police Station, who called “I am to stop the act,” and the Defendant called “I am to am to am, I am to am. I am to the above E, “I am to am to am, I am. I am. I am to am.”

As a result, the Defendant assaulted a police officer who is performing on-site mobilization and guidance duties according to 112 report, and interfered with his legitimate execution of duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes that cut a black boom;

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 suspended execution;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Community Service Orders and Orders to attend lectures;

1. Where the degree of violence, intimidation, deceptive scheme, or interference with public duties is insignificant in the mitigation area (one month to eight months) of Class 1 (Interference with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) (the degree of interference with the performance of public duties) of the sentencing criteria;

2. The Defendant, in turn, abused the victim who performed official duties in prison, thereby undermining the public authority with respect to the enforcement of the law.

The Defendant continued assault against a de facto marriage spouse while interfering with the public duties of the victim who was under the police's control in the street while leaving his spouse in a de facto marriage.

Although the Defendant has long been sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended sentence due to assault in around 2003, the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he had been sentenced to 8 times or a fine due to the crime of this kind, even though he had been sentenced to 8 times or a fine due to the crime of this kind. The Defendant does not seem to have tried a police officer to use a letter of suspicion.

However, the Defendant is fully aware of and confessions to commit the instant crime.