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.

Punishment of the crime

On March 6, 2017, at around 00:13, the Defendant: “A” in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City B, “A guest paid money to drink” did not pay the drinking value to the Defendant, a police officer belonging to the Seoul Southern Police Station D District Unit of the Incheon Southern Police Station, who called the Defendant, who takes a bath at the above restaurant, and assaulted the said E on one occasion the victim’s left kyke part of the victim’s kyke in drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution ( normal consideration considered as follows):

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the protection and observation and the order to attend the lecture [the scope of recommendation] The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act [the scope of punishment] shall be determined as per the order within the scope of the recommended punishment, taking into account the following circumstances: the defendant’s age, sexual behavior, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.:

A favorable condition: The defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and reflects his mistake.

Unfavorable circumstances: It is necessary to severely punish police officers in order to enhance their trust in national public authority with respect to their acts of obstructing the performance of public duties.

The defendant has been sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment over several times in the past, and has the record of being punished for the same kind of crime, which is highly likely to repeat the crime.