A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On January 15, 2018, at around 23:50, the Defendant 23:50, on the front day of D week located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon. On January 15, 2018, the Defendant her 112 reported and her drinking expenses to F (26 years old) assigned to the police officer belonging to the Incheon Samsan Police Station E District, which was called the Defendant, her drinking her breast at one time, obstructed the front day of the patrol car, and assaulted the Defendant her breast at two times as a drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning 112 report processing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (Attachment of image data of personal phones);

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment] and the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (no person subject to special sentencing] shall interfere with the performance of public duties;

2. The crime of this case, which was decided to be sentenced, was committed by the police officer who called out after receiving a report that the defendant is driving on the road, and brought an assault against the chest, and the nature of the crime is not easy in light of the circumstances of the crime, the degree of violence, etc.;

In order to establish the legal order, crimes that obstruct the legitimate performance of police officers' duties are recognized to require strict punishment.

The defendant has been sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with labor due to a crime of obstructing the performance of public duties in 196.

However, the defendant led to the confession of the crime and reflects his mistake.

Although the Defendant has been sentenced to seven times of criminal punishment, the remainder of criminal records resulting from the obstruction of the performance of official duties constitutes a relatively minor criminal conviction.

In the above circumstances, the sentencing conditions shown in the trial process of this case, such as character and conduct, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of crime, and circumstances after crime.