A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On October 30, 2016, around 18:30 on October 30, 2016, the Defendant assaulted the Defendant, on the ground that: (a) on the front day of Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, D, as a person having no relationship with C, C’s order to arrest him as a current offender that obstructed C’s performance of official duties; (b) the Defendant’s arrest of a flagrant offender F’s border F, and Gyeong-do’s border.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of a flagrant offender by a police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F, H and G;

1. Each police statement made in relation to F, H and G;

1. Working log and CCTV images [the Defendant and his defense counsel] asserted to the effect that there was no use of violence against the police officer because they were less favorable disease because the Defendant was slick on the ground of slickness, but did not go to the police officer. However, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, H directly observed the following circumstances acknowledged by the court, and ① the Defendant directly observed that the Defendant was at the time and place of the instant crime, G and F’s glass disease, which is called “h” to the police officer, at the time and place of the instant crime:

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) G and F testified to the effect that even though they had different knowledge of whether the Defendant was a glass bottle, they could have known that the Defendant was a glass bottled; (b) CCTV images appear to have been a favorable disease in the direction of arresting G and F, and going against the police officers in the course of performing official duties; and (c) as such, the Defendant’s assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel is rejected.

Application of Statutes

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

1. Although the criminal defendant denies his/her own crime for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, the criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea is written.