A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six 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

On March 6, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for 10 months and 2 years of suspended execution with respect to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Gwangju District Court's net support on March 6, 2009.

On September 21, 2019, at around 0.1:55, the Defendant driven a dpoter, spacker, to the front day of the main point of C located in Flue-si B, in a state of alcohol of 0.182% of blood alcohol concentration, from around the main point of C located in Flue-si B to the front day of the Flue-si and the front day of the Flue-si parking lot.

On September 11, 2019, at around 21:57, the Defendant: (a) operated a DNA cargo vehicle in front of the workplace child care center, and attempted to flee due to drinking control; (b) as F, a police official belonging to the Narman Police Station E, was prevented from driving the victim, and (c) knife the knife the knife of the knife.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning F's drinking control, which is a police officer.

Summary of Evidence

"2019 Highest 2327"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Making inquiries into the results of the control of drinking driving ( September 1, 2019);

1. Previous conviction in judgment: A copy of inquiry report and each summary order "2019 Highest 2590";

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol of statement to F;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the crime, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant's criminal records (the existence and frequency of the same kind of force, the interval between the same kind of force and the immediately preceding time) for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of probation and community service order, the nature of each of the crimes of this case, the degree of blood alcohol concentration of the defendant at the time of driving of this case, the reason why the crime of drinking driving of this case was controlled, the circumstances before and after drinking driving