A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, at around 05:30 on March 24, 2017, was identified as the perpetrator of the assault case from F, a police officer belonging to the Mapo Police Station E District, who was dispatched to the said place after receiving a report from 112 to the effect that he/she would escape from his/her will, and was requested to present his/her identification card, and the Defendant, “a Chewing flachi, flachip, flachip, flachip, flachip, flachip, flachip, and die.

The victim's knob " ," and the victim's knobs were assaulted once by both descendants.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. G statements;

1. Application of statutes, such as photographs of damage;

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. Taking into account such factors as the confession and reflect of the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, the fact that the crime is contingent, the degree of the used violence is not heavier than that of the crime, and there is no history of criminal punishment.