A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On July 27, 2020, around 16:35, the Defendant had been engaged in obstruction of performance of official duties in the Defendant’s residence, and on July 27, 202, at the residence of the Defendant, the Defendant: (a) at the residence of Goyang-gu, Goyang-gu; (b) at the residence of the Defendant, E, etc., who was called out after being reported 112 and called out, attempted to isolate the Defendant’s wife F from the Defendant’s wife; (c) at the same time, the Defendant took one-time part of the Defendant’s left shoulder; and (d) took part of the above E’s face.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

2. At around 17:12 on the date specified in paragraph (1), the Defendant spited the Defendant at the Goyang-gu Police Station Down-gu, Goyang-gu, Goyang-gu, where he was arrested as a flagrant offender on the grounds of suspicion of obstruction of performance of official duties as stipulated in the above paragraph (1), on the face of H in the security guards assigned to the Goyang Police Station D that managed the Defendant.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and H;

1. A written statement of I;

1. Application of the H photographic Acts and subordinate statutes

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

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act has reached 30 times the number of offenses committed prior to the instant case, and further, even though the Defendant had been subjected to two suspended executions due to the obstruction of performance of official duties, the Defendant repeatedly committed the instant obstruction of performance of official duties, and the form of the instant crime committed by the police officer and spiting it is very poor.

However, the sentence is not imposed in consideration of the fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized, and that police officers do not have any injury.