A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three months (the first crime committed on the market) and for six months (the second crime committed on the market).

Criminal facts

On February 6, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, threat of deadly weapons, etc.) in the Goyang Branch of the District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 2, 2014.

1. Cases 2014 Highest 1968;

A. A. On July 30, 2014, the Defendant assaulted the victim, such as taking the victim’s arms and back, while taking the part of the subway walls as drinking and threatening the subway walls, while taking the part of the victim’s desire, and taking the part of the victim’s arms and back trees, while taking the part of the Defendant’s desire to take the part of the subway walls in the subway 3-line dialogue 42 years old.

나. 모욕 피고인은 가항 일시, 장소에서 C을 폭행하던 중, 지하철 승객인 피해자 D(남, 22세)가 피고인의 행동을 휴대전화로 촬영하자, 다수의 승객들이 듣고 있는 가운데 피해자에게 “왜 동영상을 찍느냐. 어린 놈의 새끼가. 오지랖 부리지마. 씹할 새끼야. 정신병자 새끼야. 죽여 버린다.”라고 큰소리를 쳐 공연히 피해자를 모욕하였다.

2. On December 16, 2014, the Defendant: (a) arrested a flagrant offender under suspicion of assaulting Go, etc., around 01:58, in Goyang-gu, Goyang-gu, Sungyang-gu, and about one hour prior to the time, and transferred to the F Area, the Defendant taken photographs of police officers working in the F Zone; and (b) sent them to the police officers who completed the relevant documents, such as the letter of arrest of flagrant offender against the Defendant, the Defendant is an internal artist and certified. Our father is the Central Library I. The Defendant threatened the police officers H (FFF forces in the Gyeonggi-gu, the Gyeonggi Police Station of the Republic of Korea) who had completed the relevant documents, such as the letter of arrest of flagrant offender against the Defendant. The Defendant expressed that he/she will spread his/her pictures taken by the earth to the press on the Internet. N. N. N.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties concerning criminal investigations.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

2. The prosecutor's statement concerning H;

3. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding C;

4. The police of D. D.