beta
Text
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.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant, on September 22, 2018, in the "C" located in Bupyeong-si B around 05:15 on September 22, 2018, and the "customers shall have no account."
In the 112 report of the contents of “Sacheon-gu Police Station Down-gu, Seoul Special Self-Governing Province,” he expressed his desire to “I am home,” “I am going out of the shop, I am am shot, I am am shot, I am am shot, I am shot, I am am.” and assaulted on the hand floor of the above E at one time the right son.
Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reports.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Statement made by the police for E;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to victims' photographs and copies of work logs;
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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order - The defendant mistakenly dispatched the police officer's wrong mobilization to show her boom and actively assaults, and the nature of the crime is very poor.
- After the arrest of flagrant offenders, they avoided disturbance and take a bath within the earth.
- At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant has judged that he has many interference with the performance of official duties.
In addition, it took a bath and interferes with the performance of official duties.
On September 10, 2010, the Defendant was punished by a fine of one million won due to the obstruction of the performance of official duties. At the same time, the Defendant took a bath to the police officer, such as “one time as a interference with the performance of official duties”.
The defendant has a attitude to criticize the public authority.
I seem to appear.
- The Defendant, later, has recognized and opposed to the mistake.
There is no past record over the punishment of a fine.