A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On March 5, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,500,000,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, in the Changwon District Court’s branch court.

1. On April 19, 2020, the Defendant driven a 3 rocketing car at the entrance of the Tong-gu Blle at the time of drinking on April 20, 2020. On the same day, the Defendant: (a) driven a drinking-free car at C (hereinafter referred to as a “dacting-free car”); (b) snick-out car at the seat of the Defendant from the D Zone Crossing of the Tong-gu Police Station D District, which was called at the site after receiving a report on the suspicion of drunk driving; (c) snick-out, face is red, non-distance, and snick-distance, and (d) there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as witness’s statement at the site; and (d) from April 3 to 21:02 on the same day, the Defendant was demanded to comply with the drinking-free measurement by inserting the drinking-free measuring machine at the location of the same day; and (d) rejected the demand of the police officer for drinking measurement without justifiable reasons.

2. On April 19, 2020, at the same location as the preceding paragraph, the Defendant obstructed the operation of the police officer, such as blocking the police officer from standing in front of the patrol vehicle, leaving the road and the patrol vehicle on the part of the patrol vehicle, and leaving the patrol vehicle on the road and on the part of the patrol vehicle, and cutting off the Defendant from the patrol vehicle, leaving the Defendant at the patrol vehicle, and assault the police officer in the Dong-gu Police Station D District Unit of the Dong Police Station, which recommended him to return home, with flicking down the ethth of the shoulder, and flicking the above F’s left eye one time with his hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of 112 reported duties and the maintenance of order by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. The investigation report (with respect to refusal of the measurement and arrest of flagrant offenders in the obstruction of performance of official duties), investigation report (Attachment of photographs), investigation report (Attachment of photographs), booming of investigation report and booming video.