A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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

1. On November 7, 2006, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Seoul Central District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on November 7, 2007, a fine of KRW 2 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court.

At around 01:40 on October 1, 2016, the Defendant driven a DNA test M5 car owned by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol 0.134% from the 7km section of approximately 7km to the south-si Gyeongyang-si from the 181st century to the 676th century.

As a result, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice since June 1, 2006, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

2. On the same day as above 1:38 on the same day, the Defendant voluntarily accompanied the said police box to the said police box, as the police officer belonging to the Namyang Police Station, who was called out after receiving 112 reports on driving the above alcohol, at the parking lot of the Namyang Police Station: (a) on the same day as above 03:38, the Defendant refused to take a measurement of drinking by G, who is a police officer belonging to the said police box; and (b) refused it.

In order to prevent the police officers who want to photograph the Defendant under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant: (a) cut G’s hand on one occasion in a cell phone, and caused G to destroy the above mobile phone; (b) attempted to photograph the Defendant with the said mobile phone again; (c) obstructed G to take the part of G’s cell phone by hand; and (d) committed each assault, such as, at hand, she set the Defendant’s upper part of H, a police officer, who belongs to the same police box that she saw the Defendant, set off on a canter, she spreads off a canter by her hand; and (c) she took the part of the police officer, who is a police officer belonging to the same police box, one time in his/her hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on 112 handling of reports and crackdown on drinking.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Each of H, I, and J.