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.

Criminal facts

On February 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) was under influence of alcohol on the front side of Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul; (b) was assaulted by D, a police officer affiliated with the Seoul Yangcheon Police Station C police box, who was sent to the scene after receiving a report of drinking, in order for the Defendant to shoulder the Defendant, ask the Defendant for personal information; and (c) the Defendant, by hand, sent the chest of the said police officer one time, fright the face of the said police officer, and fright the face of the said police officer several times.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the protection of the people's body of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. E statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation by the prosecution (to hear statements by a wooden person);

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. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment] and the basic area (six months to one year and four months) (no person subject to special sentencing] shall interfere with the performance of public duties;

2. Determination of sentence (2 years of suspended sentence in June) of the instant crime is not good in light of its circumstances and the degree of assault, etc., and the Defendant has been punished several times prior to the instant crime, and considering the fact that there is a strong need to punish the Defendant for committing a crime against public authority, such as obstructing the performance of official duties, in order to eradicate the general public and to establish a state law and order, and to eradicate the reputation of the public authority, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine, and the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case and all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the previous theory, such as the circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined.