A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Punishment of the crime

On October 14, 2013, at around 15:40, the Defendant, at the front corridor of the Defendant’s residence of Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Apartment 101 Dong 1502, 112, which was reported as a assault case against women in the name that occurred in front of the first floor elevator of the above apartment, sent out after receiving 112 report, and the circumstances surrounding the Seoul Police Station D Zone E visited the Defendant’s residence and tried to investigate the above assault case, and “the police bomb shall be sent to his house in order to make it impossible for the Defendant to resume the above assault case.”

Therefore, when the above E prevents the Defendant, the Defendant intending to cut off the net value, the Defendant her knife knife a knife (17 cm in length), which is a dangerous object in the main machine, and assaulted the parts of the above E, etc., by putting the knife onto the floor again, and putting the knife away from the floor.

Accordingly, the defendant, carrying a dangerous object and a knife with a knife, assaulted the police officer, and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by the police officer on handling 112 Report.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;

1. Articles 144(1) and 136(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of the fact that the mental illness suffering by the defendant appears to have affected a certain part of the crime of this case, and that it reflects mistake, etc.);

1. The defense counsel on the claim of mental suffering from mental illness under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act asserts that the defendant was in a state of mental suffering due to mental illness at the time of the crime in this case. Thus, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it seems that the defendant was aware of the fact that he had received medical treatment due to mental illness before the crime in this case, but it lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.