A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten 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

1. On January 1, 2016, at around 03:06, the Defendant driven a hybrid car in the state of drinking alcohol concentration of about 0.120% from the 2km section to the two-lane parking lots of gold apartment at the same time on the front of Macheon-si B.

2. The Defendant: (a) confirmed the fact that the E Zone E District Assistant F, who was making a drunk driving at the same time and at the same place as indicated in the foregoing paragraph 1, was drunkly driven; (b) attempted to arrest a flagrant offender as a drunk driving; and (c) took a bath for the defect that “it is difficult to drive, due to the lack of fluence, due to the lack of fluent driving; and (d) assaulted the police officer’s body.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Second-time protocol concerning G concerning the examination of suspects of the police;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports and photographs;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act for the crime, and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act for the crime;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the grounds of sentencing is a convenient means of transportation. However, since the dangerous articles that can be inferred by a dangerous weapon, a person operating a motor vehicle is obliged to obtain a license and operate a motor vehicle with due care in a normal state.

In particular, drinking driving may lead to large accidents by driving under a state where the ability to exercise due diligence and physical exercise has been significantly deteriorated, and it is highly dangerous as it may cause serious harm to unspecified persons.

Although the Defendant had already been punished once due to drinking driving, the Defendant again committed a crime of drinking driving, and obstructed his official duties, such as saving the police officer who demanded a drinking test.