A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On July 23, 2020, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year on the 4 months of imprisonment with prison labor for interference with the execution of official duties in the Busan District Court’s branch branch court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 31st

【Criminal facts” on June 5, 2020, around 00:36, at the front of Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant assaulted the D’s shoulder part by hand at one time, who was urged to return home from D slope belonging to the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Police Station C District, which was called upon 112 telephone report.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Previous convictions on the Defendant’s legal statement D or E’s statement protocol 112 Report Processing Table: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (related to suspect’s criminal history), Busan District Court’s order No. 2018 High Court Decision No. 1091, May 1, 2018;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act of the choice of punishment, and imprisonment;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. An act of interference with the legitimate execution of official duties for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act by violence is an act that damages the public interest to be achieved through the execution of official duties, and at the same time it destroys the legitimate authority of the State’s action and legal order, and thus, is a serious criminal, and the Defendant’s exercise of the Defendant’s tangible power is very serious under the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that

It is not visible that the defendant's symptoms are treated against the defendant's symptoms.

In addition, considering the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., should be taken into account in the relation of concurrent crimes before and after the judgment and after the Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the fact that equity should be taken into account in the case of the judgment at the same time.