A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 02:40 on June 19, 2015, the Defendant: (a) expressed the Defendant’s desire to “C” in front of the “C” in Ansan-si B; (b) without any reason, to request the victim E (the police officer of the Seongbuk-gu Police Station D police station that sent out after receiving a 112 report that the Defendant and his/her name in secret had been in progress; and (c) without any reason, he/she sent the Defendant to the victim for the instant situation, contact details, etc., of the instant case; and (d) expressed the Defendant’s desire to “The instant dog shall be hicked and grow up by making the instant dog hick, grow up, hicked, hing the victim’s flaf, and hing the victim’s flaf so that approximately one week medical treatment is necessary for the victim.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the control of crimes, and at the same time injured the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. A written statement;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the field and damaged areas;

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

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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The application of the sentencing criteria is without presenting a separate handling method with respect to the ordinary concurrent crimes, and the sentencing criteria shall not apply to this case.

2. In light of the fact that a crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties imposed on a sentence is a crime that undermines the function of the State by nullifying a legitimate exercise of public authority, and there is a need to strictly punish such crime, and that the defendant's criminal liability is not less severe, but the defendant recognized the facts charged in this case and reflects his mistake, the injury suffered by the victimized police officer is relatively minor, the primary offender is the defendant's age, character and behavior, and family environment, etc.