A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On January 20, 2017, the Defendant entered the D community service center located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and entered the D community service center on January 20, 2017, and left the E head debt one time after public officials who were performing their duties without good cause.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted public officials and interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning civil petition affairs of public officials.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of the F witness's statement and G's statement to the 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 stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for observation of protection;

1. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the type of determination] interference with the performance of public duties, and interference with the performance of public duties, the scope of the recommended punishment [the scope of the recommended punishment] basic area [the scope of the recommended punishment] [the scope of the recommended punishment] from six months to one year and six months [the general sentencing person] mitigation element: No record of criminal punishment;

2. Whether to suspend the execution [main reasons for consideration] - None of the history of criminal punishment (general reasons for consideration] - There is no criminal record of a stay of execution or more positive: The health of the defendant is very good.

3. The punishment imposed by a defendant is determined by taking the head of a public official who performs his/her duties without any special reason, and the character of the crime is very high in light of the motive and circumstances of the crime;

A damaged public official is highly likely to criticize that he/she has processed administrative affairs on behalf of the defendant, such as implementing a refund procedure for a part of the administrative fine imposed on the defendant as a basic living recipient.

The defendant, even in the police investigation, was consistent with the non-cooperative attitude in the investigation without any reflection.

Damage public officials have been suffering from mental suffering due to the defendant's crime.

In order to protect the functions of the public authority and eradicate the spirit of the public authority, the accused's crime is committed.