A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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. At around 02:10 on March 28, 2020, the Defendant received 112 reports on the occurrence of vision due to calculating the drinking value at the “C” restaurant located in Ulsandong-gu, Ulsan-gu, and requested the Defendant to calculate the drinking value at the site, the Defendant made a fluor E belonging to the Ulsan-dong Police Station D District of the Ulsan-dong Police Station D, which called the site, and obstructed the Defendant’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of reports by the police officer by taking into account the body of the E and taking the face of the 112.

2. The Defendant, at the above date, was arrested as a flagrant offender due to the obstruction of the performance of official duties, and was on the patrol vehicle, and caused injury to the victim E, by walking the victim E’s knick damages, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes requesting victim's photograph and cooperation in investigation;

1. Relevant Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

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. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc., the Defendant asserts that the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

However, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances such as the background and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, which was acknowledged by the evidence as seen earlier, there was no ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol.

(b) the State or a local government-invested institution.