A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

At around 06:30 on April 8, 2018, the Defendant: (a) reported “C” at the convenience store located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, which read “C” to the effect that “Neman drink drinks drinks within the convenience store” and sent to the site, and assaulted “A” from the security guards belonging to the Gyeonggi-do Police Station D branch of the Gyeonggi Police Station, who called to the site upon receiving a request from “Ieman, who did not drink within the convenience store”; and (b) tried to go out of the above convenience store to “Ieman, who made a mistake of inside and outside of the convenience store; and (c) attempted to go back to the above E on the ground of drinking.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of police statement concerning E and F;

1. A copy of the assault, a photograph of injury, and a written diagnosis;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Listening to the Eline Statement of Victim Police Officers);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria [Scope of Recommendation] The basic area (six months to one year and six months) of the obstruction of performance of official duties (in the event of the obstruction of performance of official duties) shall not be applicable;

2. The Defendant, who was sentenced to the sentence, was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment or 2 years of suspended execution due to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties in 199, and was sentenced to a fine four times from 2008 to 2017 due to violence or violation of the Road Traffic Act.

The Defendant, even though he had the opportunity to know about abnormal behavior or violence during drinking, has again reached the crime of this case.

Defendant assaulted police officers who perform duties by suffering from work uniforms, thereby impairing the public authority with respect to law enforcement, and the degree of exercise of the Defendant’s tangible power is not less exceptionally, and the police officer, who is the victim, is equivalent to the nose.