Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of each of the above penalties shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants, in collusion on October 16, 2016, at the hotel E in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (01:55); Defendant A, upon receiving a report from 112, to the effect that “all adults drink while drinking alcohol,” Defendant A is demanded to present a chemical gift on his hand from H and policeman I, who was dispatched to the site after receiving the report from 112, to the effect that “I will drink you want to go on his hand;

Defendant B, who was arrested as an offender in the act of interference with the performance of official duties, committed assault against the said I’s chest by breath, and obstructed the police officer’s 112-report processing duties and legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of the offender in the act of assaulting Defendant B with the above I’s arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A protocol concerning suspect interrogation of the defendant A by the prosecution;

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the Defendants

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the H’s written statement;

1. Relevant Articles 136(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts (the Defendants’ choice of imprisonment)

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the Defendants) of the suspended sentence (the scope of recommendation / [the scope of punishment ] interference with the performance of official duties, and the basic area ( June -1 year - 4 months) (the decision of sentence] / the decision of sentence / the commission of police officers dispatched and controlled by the Defendants after receiving a report of gambling by the Defendants shall be subject to criticism.

However, Defendant A did not have any other record of punishment except for the punishment of fine of KRW 700,00 due to drinking driving in 2003, Defendant B had been punished four times due to violence, but again used violence. However, since 2004, Defendant A did not have any record of being punished, there was no record of being punished more severe than that of fines, Defendants are in depth, and all kinds of sentencing conditions such as the age of the Defendants are considered.