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 March 7, 2017, around 00:45, the Defendant called up after receiving 112 a report that the Defendant carried a taxi driver, and identified the details of the report against the taxi driver, the Defendant demanded that the police box of the police station C, who was affiliated with the police box of the branch police station, sent back to the patrol lane to the police box who was solicited to return home from the police box of the branch of the branch police station to the police station who was informed of the details of the report by the Defendant, and the Defendant called up to the police box of the branch of the branch police station of the branch police station of Sungnam-si.

“Along with the Defendant’s hand, the Defendant committed assault, such as 2-3 rounding the D’s mouth, and satising D’s chest.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (to hear statements by victimized police officers);

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 suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Where the sentencing criteria [Scope of the recommended punishment] is minor in the area where the reduction area (no more than eight months of imprisonment) is mitigated (no more than eight months of imprisonment), a threat of violence, a deceptive scheme, or a degree of interference with the performance of official duties of the person concerned;

2. The Defendant rendered a sentence of sentence: (a) the police officer, who was called out after receiving a report at the 112 taxi engineer and the Si guard, confirmed the circumstances of the instant case and recommended him to return home; and (b) the police officer, who mobilized the police vehicle within the nomenclature and prevented him from carrying out his official duties; and (c) thus, the offense is not good in light of the details thereof and the method thereof, etc.

In addition, the defendant has already been punished four times due to the obstruction of the performance of official duties, and has been punished for other violent crimes, and the defendant has not been aware of it even though he was under the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, which was committed by assault at the time of the crime of this case.

However, the defendant shows the attitude of misunderstanding and reflecting in depth.

At the time, it is net.