A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Criminal facts

[Criminal Justice] On April 29, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of assault at the Seoul Central District Court on April 29, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 6, 2016, and is still under suspension

【Criminal Facts】

On August 15, 2016, at around 03:15, the Defendant: (a) assaulted the police officer’s face to the above police officer’s face on the ground that, upon receiving a report from 112 that “the drinking drinks go to other customers and employees.” (b) the Defendant called the “D” restaurant located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and demanded the F to return home by a police officer belonging to the E-gu Seoul Gangseo Police Station E-gu, Seoul Gangseo-gu, Seoul, and called the said police officer, who called the “Ig, I would like to kill the so-top head k-top ki, I would like to die.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers regarding the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. G statements;

1. Previous convictions: Application of criminal records and investigation reports (the same criminal records of a suspect and judgments related to the suspension of execution) and statutes;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 136(1) of the Criminal Code of the relevant statutory provisions on criminal facts [the scope of recommendation] The obstruction of performance of official duties [Article 1] The basic area of the obstruction of performance of official duties [Article 1]: June-1 year and April [Special Convict] mitigation due to the reasons for mitigation (abstinence minor degree of violence): January-8 [Pronouncement Decision] in the course of the instant crime, the degree of violence exercised in the course of the instant crime, and the circumstances where the Defendant recognized his mistake as a substitute, etc., it cannot be said that there is a great possibility of criticism against the Defendant.

However, the Defendant not only had the record of having been sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment or a fine for crimes such as violence, obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. prior to the instant case, but also has been sentenced to imprisonment for the crime of assault at the time of the instant case