A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

피고인은 2018. 11. 30. 18:40경 보령시 B에 있는 피고인의 집에서, 피고인의 어머니로부터 ‘아들에게 폭행을 당했다’는 112신고를 받고 출동한 보령경찰서 C파출소 소속 경위 D, 경위 E, 경위 F, 경사 G이 신고 내용 확인을 위해 집 안에 들어가려고 하자, 한 손에 위험한 물건인 금속제 칼갈이 1개(날길이 약 31cm)를 들고, 다른 손에 위험한 물건인 부엌칼 3개(칼날길이 각각 20cm, 17.5cm, 19cm)를 들고, 상의 주머니에 접이식 칼 1개(칼날길이 약 9.5cm)를 휴대하고 손에 들고 있는 금속제 칼갈이를 위 경찰관들에게 던지려는 시늉을 하여 협박하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous articles and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the handling of 112 Reporting Cases and the control of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement about G, H and D;

1. Application of police seizure records and photographs and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Articles 144 (1) and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. Probation under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to seven years;

2. Aggravation of the obstruction of performance of official duties (category 1): The scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines for the crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties (category 1): In cases of showing the threat of organization and mass or carrying dangerous objects (the scope of recommendations and recommendations), the area of aggravation of punishment [the scope of recommendations and recommendations], one year to four years.

3. The instant crime of this case, with carrying dangerous articles, is not likely to pose a serious threat to the safety of police officers during lawful performance of their duties, and thus, requires the choice of imprisonment.

However, the defendant's mistake and the police officer's mistake.