A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

피고인은 2014. 5. 25. 23:50경 경기 광명시 광명로941 ‘서울한의원’ 앞 길에서, 자신이 탔던 택시의 운전사가 불친절하여 택시를 발로 찼다며 경찰에 신고를 한 후, 출동한 광명경찰서 소속 경사 C으로부터 피고인이 술에 취한 상태에서 도로로 뛰어드는 등 위험한 행동을 한다는 이유로 제지를 당하자 화가 나, C에게 ‘씹할놈아’라고 욕설을 하면서 C의 얼굴에 침을 뱉었다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the control of crimes and maintenance of public order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of photographic Acts and subordinate statutes after closure;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. include the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime despite three times (one suspended sentence, one time of imprisonment, and two times of imprisonment); (b) the Defendant spiting the Defendant’s behavior against the Defendant’s mistake; (c) the Defendant’s appearance of the instant crime is very good; (d) the Defendant reflects the Defendant’s mistake; (d) the Defendant did not have the same criminal power; (e) the Defendant did not have any criminal power after he did not have any force; (e) the Defendant’s child’s friendship appears to result in the instant crime after drinking; (e) the Defendant’s personal support with his mother; and (e) the various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of the instant case and recommendations based on sentencing guidelines are considered.