A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On May 29, 2020, the Defendant, from the stairs of commercial buildings located in B at 23:25 o-si on May 29, 202, the Defendant saw customers to grow.

“Chewing” is a defect in which Doman affiliated with the C District of the G District of the Mado Police Station, who received a report on the content of 112, sought to verify the personal information of the Defendant. The personal information of the Defendant should be known on this day.

Chewing gale;

D. D. D.C., D.C. and D.

“In doing so, assaulted D’s chest part by hand, with a strong fashion, and continued to do so once.”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written statements made by the defendant in court;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with labor for one month to five years;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines / [type 1] Interference in the performance of official duties on the grounds of a crime interfering with the performance of official duties / [No person subject to special sentencing] [the territory of recommendations and the scope of the recommended punishment] basic area, six months through one year and six months.

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months, the period leading to the instant crime for two years, the extent of interference with the performance of official duties resulting therefrom, and in particular, the extent of the Defendant’s assault is minor;

It is difficult to see that the previous criminal records of the defendant and the previous criminal punishment of the defendant are disadvantageous to the defendant, but the crime of this case is likely to have occurred by contingency, and all other circumstances including the defendant's reflectiveness, etc. shall be determined as per the order.