A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On June 15, 2017, the Defendant does not pay the drinking value to the C dan, which is located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, and on the road in front of the C dan, Seo-gu, Daejeon.

“A police officer E belonging to the Busan Police Station D District of Police Station who was called up upon the report of 112 by the operator of the above main station shall be asked for the reasons why the police officer E did not pay the drinking value; and

D, as you see the zone, I want to cross the road, "I am, I am, I am, and I am to cross the road, and the above police officer E saw the defendant's arms and flabed, and flabed it, and flabed the above E's left arms.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on handling 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. Reporting internal investigation (Obstruction, etc. of the performance of official duties);

1. Investigation report (police officer E telephone call result);

1. The place where he works in the D District;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes (E) of damaged photographs;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62(1) of the Act on Suspension of Execution (Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act provides that the Defendant has committed the instant crime when committing the instant crime, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime by contingency, and the Defendant does not have any previous conviction exceeding the fine (two times) shall be deemed to have committed the instant crime in favor of the Defendant under normal circumstances favorable to the Defendant, and the Defendant’s assaulting the police officer performing public duties by taking uniform would interfere with public

It can be seen that the defendant did not agree with the victimized police officer, that the victimized police officer wanted to punish the defendant, that the defendant's efforts to recover damage of the victimized police officer is insufficient, and that the defendant has been punished twice for the crime of this kind, and that there are two records that the defendant has been punished for the crime of this kind, the age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the defendant's age, sexual behavior, motive, means, and consequence.