A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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 28, 2020, the Defendant is in front of the C cafeteria located in Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Michuhol-gu, around 19:50 on June 28, 2020.

It seems necessary to protect.

” 라는 112 신고를 받고 출동한 미추홀경찰서 D 지구대 소속 경위 E으로부터 귀가할 것을 요구 받자, 욕설을 하면서 위 경찰관을 향해 주먹을 2회 휘두르고, 발로 위 경찰관의 왼쪽 허벅지 부위를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of order of police officers and the handling of reports 112.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes in F of the police statement protocol to E;

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 punishment by law: Imprisonment with labor for one month to five years;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines / [type 1] Interference in the performance of official duties on the grounds of a crime interfering with the performance of official duties / [No person subject to special sentencing] [the territory of recommendations and the scope of the recommended punishment] basic area, six months through one year and six months.

3. The crime of this case, where the defendant was sentenced to punishment, is found to have obstructed the legitimate execution of duties by the police officer, such as obstructing the police officer's use of bucks one time by leaving the police officer two times of drinking to the police officer, etc. in light of the contents of the crime, the liability for the crime is heavy, the defendant has not yet been used by the damaged police officer, and the defendant has been punished as a fine for interference with duties even recently, and the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant are recognized.

However, the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime and reflects the Defendant’s mistake in depth, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a somewhat contingent and contingent manner, and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and crime.