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

피고인은 2015. 12. 27. 00:24 경 서울 광진구 B 건물 1 층에서 신고를 받고 출동한 서울 광진 경찰서 C 파출소 소속 경찰관인 D로부터 제지를 받자 위 경찰관에게 “ 짭새 개새끼야. 공권력 좆같네.

C. T. T. H. T. T. T. H. H. shall be discarded.

“A public bath,” etc., and the snow part of the police officer’s snow was fluent once by drinking, and the part of the buckbuck area was walking twice, thereby hindering the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning criminal investigation and prevention.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act / [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (six months to one year and four months) of the first category (Interference with the performance of official duties and coercion of duties) [Judgment of sentence] [Judgment of sentence] Defendant is the first offender, but police officers D wishing to punish Defendant, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the above Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be comprehensively considered.

Rejection of Public Prosecution

1. Around December 27, 2015, the Defendant entered the first floor of the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City building B without permission to take out from the victim E (61 tax) who is a security guard, and used the victim’s face, shoulder, etc. at least twice by hand.

2. The judgment is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the records, the victim E expressed his/her intention not to prosecute the defendant after the prosecution of this case.