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 this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On February 21, 2015, at around 01:50, the Defendant reported on the 1112 report that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and recommended him to return home from the police officer D belonging to the police officer of the Sungsung Western Police Station, who was called to the site after being reported on the 112 report that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, and was able to take a bath, and served him with drinking.

After that, the Defendant, who was arrested as a flagrant offender in the case of obstruction of performance of official duties and carried out a police box of the Sungsung Police Station, and was reported by the above police officer to get off the police station at the patrol, assaulted the body of the above police officer on several occasions.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the police officer's 112 reports and legitimate execution of duties concerning arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of the balance of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of recommendations] shall be the basic area (six months to one year and four months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (the obstruction of performance of official duties) (the scope of recommendations];

2. Determination of sentence: The sentence shall be determined as per the order, taking into consideration six months of imprisonment, the extent and extent of violence committed by the defendant for two years of suspended execution, the degree of interference with the execution of official duties, the fact that the defendant has committed three times a previous offense by the defendant, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime and imprisonment without prison labor or any heavier punishment, the fact that the defendant has drinking and contingently committed a crime, and other various matters specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are conditions for sentencing, such as the age, character and behavior and environment of the defendant as shown in the records and arguments of this case;