A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On February 8, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor or 2 years of suspended execution in the Seoul Central District Court on February 8, 2017, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 16, 2017, and is still under suspended execution.

Around 01:55 on April 25, 2018, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the C cafeteria located in Seocheon-si B, Seocheon-si, 112, and was requested by the police officer D, a police officer belonging to the Seocheon-si Police Station, and E to take a house on the road from the police officer belonging to the Seocheon-si Police Station, which was called by the Defendant. The Defendant provided a bath to the above police officer. In order to move the vehicle, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the 15 driver’s seat at the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si Police Station F 15, and took a bath to move the vehicle, and she laid down a glass door above the driver’s seat at the floor on the hand, and moved it again to the 15 straw, and put it under the bottom of the vehicle into the bottom, and put it under the influence of the vehicle, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning 112 reporting handling duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D or E;

1. A written statement of witness of G;

1. Service site for police officers in mobilization;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history (A), a report on investigation (verifications during the same type of force and the period of suspended execution), and the text of the judgment;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of the Defendant’s choice of imprisonment with prison labor, the defense counsel at the time of the instant case was in a state of loss of mental or physical health or mental weakness, as well as at the time of the instant case

However, in light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the means and methods of the commission of the crime, the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, and the details of the Defendant’s statement, etc., the Defendant was in a state where the ability to discern things or make decisions was lost or weak.

Since it cannot be determined by a person, the above argument is without merit.

The reason for sentencing.