A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

On February 20, 2013, at the D District Unit of the Suwon-gu Suwon-gu Police Station (Seoul-gu) around 23:05, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the police officer from performing his/her legitimate official duties in relation to his/her global situation, without any special reason, while under the influence of alcohol; (b) applied a computer monitor in the earth; (c) applied a disturbance to a civil petition reception unit; (d) the victim E (45 years of age) who is a police officer belonging to the said earth controlled the Defendant; and (e) released the police officer from the earth; (e) sent him/her out of the earth; and (e) sent him/her one time to the outside of the earth; (e) the police officer’s entrance and exit of the said police officer three times in front of the said earth; and (e) interfere with the police officer’s legitimate performance of official duties in relation to his/her global situation service; and (e) interfere with the above police officer’s left-hand unit, which requires approximately two weeks medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. A report on investigation (including statements of witness in the F border), a report on investigation (a report on the results of reading the CCTV data in a district and the closure of a photograph);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of victims;

1. Articles 136 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel stated that the defendant was shaking a computer monitor and posted it on a civil petition reception unit, but that alone did not constitute violence and that there was no intention to interfere with the performance of official duties. However, the defendant's act of putting a computer monitor as stated in the above district unit where police officers E works, such as the crime in the above district unit where police officers E works, is a assault against the police officer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Do326, Mar. 24, 1981). Accordingly, the defendant's act of taking it into the reception unit of civil petition reception unit is a assault against the police officer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Do