A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

Of the facts charged of this case, the prosecution against assault is dismissed.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On June 28, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Busan District Court on February 26, 2019 and completed the execution of the sentence at the Busan Detention Center.

【Criminal Facts】

On January 2, 2020, at around 12:15, the Defendant: (a) arrested a flagrant offender for the same reason as described in paragraph (1) from a slope D belonging to the Gyeonggi-gu Seoul Police Station, the Namnam Police Station, which was called on the road of Suwon-si, and received a report on 112 on the face of Suwon-si B, and obstructed legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of a flagrant offender by taking down spiting down spits on the face of the said D, and he was subject to the removal from the said slope D several times, and thereby interfered with the Defendant’s face at the entrance of the police box.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A report on internal investigation and investigation report (a video case submitted by a participating police officer);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, etc. inquiry report (A), investigation report (verification report on the fact of releasing a suspect from a repeated crime related thereto);

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The sentencing conditions stated in the records, such as the defendant's age, occupation, character and conduct, family relationship, and circumstances before and after the crime, among repeated crimes, shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances under Article 35 of the Criminal Act:

It is necessary to strictly punish an offense of obstruction of performance of official duties as an offense of harming the function of the state by obstructing the exercise of legitimate public authority.

- The crime of this case was committed during the period of repeated crime due to the above criminal record.

- The Defendant repeatedly committed an act interfering with duties by telephone to a court while under the influence of alcohol while being tried to commit the instant crime. In light of the circumstances after the Defendant committed the crime, it does not seem that the Defendant’s depth is against the Defendant.

The defendant committed the crime of this case.