A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 01:50 on June 20, 2020, the Defendant was under influence of alcohol on the front side of “Ccafeteria” located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the police officer E belonging to the Seoul Gwanak-gu Police Station D Zone D, Seoul, who was called upon the report that the drinkinger is growing on the road, asked the Defendant’s shoulder and name, and asked him “I am out of the cover of E”, and am under the direction of “I am, spacife, spacife, and so on.” The police officer belonging to the above District F was under the face of F.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. Application of investigation report (CCTV image analysis and examination of suspicion of damage to property) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned (the point of obstruction of performance of official duties);

1. Where an act of violence or intimidation is committed against multiple public officials who perform the same duties as an ordinary concurrent act, multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties are established according to the number of public officials who perform official duties, and where the above act of violence or intimidation was committed in the same opportunity at the same place, and it is assessed as one act under the social concept, multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties are crimes of conceptual concurrence.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3505 Decided June 25, 2009). Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. It is advantageous to the fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is that the defendant confessions all of the crimes and is against the law, and that the violence committed to police officers does not seem to be significantly serious.

However, the defendant received 112 reports and used violence to police officers called out without justifiable reasons, and the nature of such crime is not good.

The defendant on March 6, 2015.