A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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.

Criminal facts

On February 26, 2017, the Defendant was urged to pay the taxi fee upon questioning by the slope C belonging to the Ulsan Southern-gu Police Station B, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do University about 00:55 at the front of the 38-dong community service center of the 147 U.S., and upon receiving a report, “A guest who does not pay the taxi fee” at the front of the 38-dong community service center.

Defendant 1 was under the influence of alcohol, and was under the influence of Defendant C’s head.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the maintenance of public peace and order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Written statements of D;

1. A receipt (taxi expense) and a list of reported cases;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including observation of protection and community service order;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to five years; and

2. Application of the sentencing criteria [Type Determination] The basic area [Determination in the sphere of recommendation] of Type 1 (Interference with and Forced Performance of Official Duties] [Determination in the sphere of recommendation] [Scope of punishment] from six months to one year and six months [whether suspended sentence is suspended] - Criminal records of suspended execution at least twice adversely.

3. The act of assaulting a police officer who performs legitimate duties concerning the decision-making and public peace of a sentence and the maintenance of order is bad in the quality of crime as a challenge to social safety, and the defendant's head is obvious to inflict a serious injury upon the police officer's head and thus the degree of interference with the execution of official duties is not less severe. Prior to the instant case, the defendant was sentenced to suspension of execution of imprisonment with prison labor due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, such as obstruction of the performance of official duties, damage to public goods, and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act. It was three times the suspension of execution of imprisonment with prison labor, two times the fine, due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc