A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around September 24, 2017, the Defendant: (a) was under the influence of alcohol in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul at the front of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Seoul around September 18:11, 2017; and (b) Seoul, upon receiving a report from 112, called “a person on a street”, called “Seoul, a person on a street”, recommended the victim E belonging to the Pyeongtaek Police Station D District for returning home with the Defendant’s shoulder; and (c) was driving the victim among a large number of drivers.

They have a choice.

C. Hexa, Y. Hexa, do not walk, and N. N. N. S. police officers.

The victim publicly insultingd the victim by stating that he/she “atisfy”.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and place as indicated in the above paragraph 1, abused the Defendant, i.e., to arrest the Defendant as an insulting offender, to take the face of the above E once, to take one time by hand, and to cut off the head of the above E once.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the police officer's 112 report processing and legitimate execution of duties concerning arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement of F and G;

1. Complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of a work log and a police officer certificate;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and the selection of fines for criminal facts;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection and observation lies in the fact that the defendant wears his uniform and assaults and insults the police officers performing official duties, and that the defendant has a record of the suspension of execution of imprisonment for the same kind of crime, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in light of the favorable circumstances in which the defendant's mistake is divided, the form of force used by the defendant, the degree of expression of insulting speech, performance, and various factors of sentencing, including the age, sex, environment, etc. of the defendant, shall be determined in accordance with the order.

On the Defendant’s argument.