A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four 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

On November 14, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 14:40 on November 14, 2016, the Defendant was sent to the hospital by police officers D and members of the Seoul Gangnam Police Station C police station, who called the Defendant, after receiving 112 reports, to whom the Defendant was sent.

around 15:10 on November 14, 2016, the Defendant was sent to a hospital as above, while drunk, and the Defendant expressed the above D’s face “I am drinking 2 sick, the Republic of Korea does not punish the drinking person, and she does not punish him/her,” and her her hand, her her her hand, her her her her face, and she was her head her her head she was her left her, and her her her her her her her hand her her her hand her her hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the protection of the life, body and property of the people.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. E statements;

1. Application of CCTV Acts and subordinate statutes;

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. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

In light of various circumstances, such as the circumstances surrounding the instant crime, means, details of the crime, and the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and thus, the foregoing assertion cannot be accepted.

The grounds for sentencing [the scope of the recommended sentence] The crime of this case, which was decided on the basic area (from June to January, 1) of the first category (Interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of duties) of sentencing, is inferior to the nature of the crime, and the defendant is the defendant.