A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four 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

On April 15, 2020, at around 19:40 on April 15, 2020, the Defendant: (a) received a report from the head of the police station affiliated with the police station of the Seoul Guro-gu, Seoul, to require confirmation of personal information and presentation of identification cards from the head of the police station affiliated with the police station of the Guro-gu, Seoul, and assaulted the above E on one occasion to walk the right direction of the road and the flance parts of the building of the Guro-gu Seoul, Seoul, under the influence of alcohol.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling Table;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. On the grounds of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, the following conditions of sentencing shall be comprehensively taken into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.

The crime of this case was committed against a police officer who is performing legitimate duties, and the nature of the crime is not weak in light of the details and contents of the crime, and the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is a crime that interferes with legitimate performance of duties by public officials and obstructs public authority by the State, and thus there is a need for strict punishment: The defendant is aware of his/her crime and reflects his/her mistake in depth; the defendant was found to have committed the crime of this case by contingency; the defendant did not cause any specific harm to the life or body of the victimized police officer by the crime of this case; the victimized police officer submitted a written application for non-prosecution of punishment to the effect that he/she does not want punishment against the defendant; and the crime of obstruction of official duties is a crime of this case other than a fine of this case.