A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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 November 3, 2017, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the roads front of South and North Navy, South and North Korea on November 3, 2017, and without any particular reason.

112 reported as if the Defendant was aware of suicide, and reported to the police officer D (52 ) affiliated with the police officer of the Southern Sea Police Station C police box of the Southern Sea Police Station C (52 ) prior to the dispatch, to handle the Defendant’s report, and held a chief patrol officer and held D with the patrol officer and “h. Chewing h. Chewing f. N. N. police officer.

Korea should not be food.

“In doing so, spiting the face of D twice in the face of hand, thereby obstructing the legitimate execution of duties in relation to the handling of D 112 reporting duties by assaulting D 112 by spiting it twice in the face of hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or E;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (to attach a detailed statement for processing a case reported 112 and to a fire fighting track for the on-site dispatch);

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 suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including observation of protection and community service order;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria [Scope of the recommended punishment] The basic area (from June to June) of the basic area (from June to June) of the sentencing criteria shall not interfere with the execution of public duties;

2. Crimes that interfere with the performance of official duties by police officers in the process of performing a decision-making on sentence of punishment are not very good in that the nature of such crimes is very good in that the police officers’ pride and desire to work significantly impede the police officers and the resulting damage will eventually return to the general public.

In addition, in light of the content of the instant crime and the criminal history of the Defendant, it is necessary to punish the Defendant with strict punishment in that it is necessary to sacrife against the Defendant’s violent tendency and attitude to sacrife public authority.

However, the fact that the defendant repents his wrong and reflects his or her wrong, supports young children, and other ages of the defendant;