A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On September 27, 2015, the Defendant, at around 22:10, performed drinking together with D and one other, who was a brue at a house located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, and had been designated due to the default of a fine, carried out approximately 200 meters away from the above place in order to avoid arrest by F, a police officer who belongs to the Suwon-gu Police Station E box, but went away from the above place, and was arrested pursuant to the above F, the Defendant, with intent to interfere with arrest, carried the above D’s left shape, shape, back part, shoulder, shoulder part, shoulder part, etc. of the above F, to take aboard the patrol vehicle parked in the nearby area with the intent to interfere with arrest.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to F and G;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [the scope of recommendation] / The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order / [the scope of punishment / [the person who has been subject to special sentencing] does not have any basic field (6 months - 1 year and 4 months) / [the person who has been subject to special sentencing] : The crime of this case is highly likely to interfere with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers concerning the arrest of the designated persons; the necessity of punishment is high; the circumstances favorable to the fact that the defendant has been convicted of violence: the defendant is recognized as committing a crime; the fact that the defendant appears to be a contingent crime; the fact that there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine due to the obstruction of the performance of official duties; the fact that there is no criminal conviction exceeding the fine due to the obstruction of the