A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On April 12, 2018, around 02:16, the Defendant was punished by a dispute on the issue of B and taxi rate, which is the former taxi driver, at the front of the 103-dong-dong-ro 19, the 41-ro, Seo-gu, Busan, Seo-gu, Busan.

The Defendant, upon receiving a report at the same time and at the same place, was salvated and shabed on the ground that the security guards D of the police box affiliated with the Busan Franc police box and the patrolmen demand the Defendant to pay the fare and return home.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or E;

1. B written statements;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Type 1 (Interference with the performance of public duties and coercion of duties) in the basic area (six months to one year and six months) (a person who has a special sentencing factor) of the sentencing criteria; and

2. The crime of this case on the sentence of sentence is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, in order to establish the state’s legal order and eradicate the danger of public authority, where the defendant was sent to a police officer after having received a report, and thus obstructing the police officer’s legitimate performance of his official duties by sprinking him. The crime of this case is committed against the defendant, such as the following: (a) there was a criminal record of having been sentenced to a fine once for the same crime; and (b) there is a need to strictly punish the crime of interference with the performance of official duties in order to eradicate the danger of public authority.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that the damaged police officer wanted the defendant's wife, and that the defendant would not repeat the same mistake again.

The circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as hardening situations, and other circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, means and result of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc.