A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to 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

피고인은 2017. 10. 14. 04:49 경 수원시 장안구 송 원로 109-42에 있는 경기경찰 전직지원센터 앞에서 ‘ 집 앞에 친구가 떨어지지 않고 있으니 데려 다 달라’ 는 112 신고를 받고 출동한 수원 중부 경찰서 B 지구대 소속 순경 C이 신고자 D에게 접근하려고 하는 피고인을 막아서자 “ 씨 발 나 존나 빡 쳤어 ”라고 소리치며 C의 몸을 밀치고, 재차 신고자에게 접근하려는 피고인을 C이 막아서려고 하자 손으로 C의 어깨를 밀치고, 발로 오른쪽 허벅지를 걷어 차 폭행하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection and Order to Attend Community Service and Order to Attend Military Service, and Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc., the Defendant damaged the public authority regarding the enforcement of the Act by using violence

It seems that the police officer should request assistance because the extent of the type used by the defendant while taking a bath for about 10 minutes is considerable.

The Defendant was subject to a fine twice in 2008 and 2014 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and was subject to a total of four times, including assault in 2012, 2013, and 2016, and was subject to a total of four times, such as twice in 2012, 2013, and 2016. The Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he had sufficiently been given the opportunity to be aware that his violent inclination was revealed upon the withdrawal of alcohol. However, the Defendant was fully aware of and against all the instant crimes.

There is no criminal offense beyond a fine against the defendant.

(2).