A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2019. 4. 28. 01:15경 부산 연제구 B에 있는 C 앞길에서, 택시비를 지급하지 않으면서 택시를 발로 차고, 택시 뒤에 정차한 차량운전자에게 시비를 건다는 112 신고를 받고 출동한 부산연제경찰서 D지구대 소속 경장 E으로부터 그곳에 있던 시민에게 욕설하는 것을 제지당하게 되자 위 E에게 “야, 이 씹할, 짭새 새끼들아, 닥쳐라, 죽고 싶냐”라고 욕설을 하면서 왼손으로 위 E의 오른쪽 눈 부위를 1회 때렸다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning 112 report processing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement to F and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (as to the situation, etc. at the time of leaving the site);

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

2. 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 punishment by law: Imprisonment for not less than one month but not more than five years;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria: From six months to one year and six months (decision of type): The obstruction of the performance of official duties [Article 1] the obstruction of the performance of official duties [Article 1]/ the coercion of official duties [Article 1] [Scope of recommendations and recommendations] basic area: Imprisonment with labor for six months to one year and six months.

3. The defendant who has rendered a sentence of sentence is not sufficient to commit the crime by assaulting a police officer on duty without any particular reason.

The crime that interferes with the police officer's performance of official duties needs to be punished strictly in order to establish the law and order of the state and eradicate the light of the public authority.

However, the defendant seems to have led to confession and reflect on the crime of this case.

The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a contingency under the influence of alcohol at the time.

The degree of violence used by the defendant against the victim seems to be significant.