A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that 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

On October 21, 2019, at around 21:05, the Defendant, while drunkly worked in front of the Daegu Northern apartment, was breading D’s seat leading to the Daegu Northern Police Station C and the Gyeongbuk-gu mobile phone in which drinking control was performed, and the Defendant was asked by D, who was asked by D about the reasons for the taking, “the width is raising why the vehicle is going to be going to be a carmer,” and bread, who was able to take the hand, and boomd D’s breast part by hand, and who was tightly pushed into E’s breast part by hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of police officers' duties concerning drinking control.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the place of work outside C;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the "justifiable circumstances") of the suspended sentence;

1. The scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of type] the obstruction of performance of official duties (category 1] and no person who has been engaged in the obstruction of performance of official duties [the scope of the recommended area and the scope of the recommended punishment] and the basic area of the recommendation [the scope of the recommended area and the punishment of the recommendation], six months to one year

2. Determination of sentence: (a) comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the commission, circumstances after the commission of the commission of the commission, etc.; and (b) the conditions of various sentencing as shown in the argument of the instant case:

D. Unfavorable circumstances: The crime of this case is a case of assaulting police officers on official duty, and it is not good that the crime of this case is committed.

The favorable circumstances: The defendant is aware of all the crimes of this case and reflects it.

The degree of tangible power exercised by the defendant is not very important.

The defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case contingently while drunk.

There is no criminal conviction or fine exceeding the same criminal record or fine for the defendant.