A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 14, 2017, the Defendant received a 112 report from police officers D belonging to the Namyang-gu Police Station C commander of the Gyeonggi-do Police Station, which called to the site on July 14, 2017, to the effect that domestic violence is doubtful at the apartment complex located in 337 U.S., Namyang-gu, 337 U.S., and received an explanation of the case from the Defendant: “A is a police officer”;

맞짱 뜨자 ”라고 말을 하면서 손으로 위 경찰관의 가슴을 밀치고 주먹으로 옆구리를 1회 가격하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The witness D’s legal statement [the defendant alleged that although he was involved in the fry of D’s chest, he did not purchase the next fry by drinking. However, according to the witness D’s testimony, the fact that the defendant prices the next fry of D’s chest by drinking.

On this occasion, the witness E: the police officer at the time showed that the defendant was sealed by the police officer at the time to drive the defendant into the police station;

However, even if the defendant's testimony was based on not only on the witness D's legal statement but also on the defendant's legal statement, the defendant's testimony is called the police officer D'.

Even though D continued to listen to the circumstances of the instant case, D was about to listen to the Defendant, and the following parts of D’s chest was pushed to D, and it was not consistent with the witness E’s statement on the ground that it was not consistent with D’s witness E’s statement on the ground that police officers did not want to drive the Defendant to the police station before D’s chest was pushed to the Defendant. Thus, this part of the witness E’s statement is without credibility).

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The act of assaulting a police officer during the lawful execution of official duties for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act requires strict punishment on the ground that the act itself constitutes a serious crime.

However, the degree of assault is not limited.