A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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. On August 28, 2016, at around 05:57, the Defendant reported that the Defendant had no Defendant’s vehicle in front of the D restaurant in Gwangju-dong-gu, Gwangju-gu, by finding out the Defendant’s vehicle parked in the nearby area by the police officer E, and attempted to leave the scene, and then, under the influence of alcohol, damaged the Defendant’s front front sentence of the F patrol by even a single repair cost of approximately KRW 336,600 on one occasion, without any special reason.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged the goods used by public offices.

2. Defendant E’s attempt to arrest Defendant E as a current offender for the crime of damaging public goods at the above date and time, and at the above place, the police officer attempted to arrest Defendant E as a current offender for the crime of damaging public goods.

“In doing so, the Defendant, who was stopped by breast and knicking the above police officer, was physically faced with the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Defendant’s hand was assaulted at one time on the left side of the police officer.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E, G and H;

1. Partial statement of the protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant by the prosecution;

1. Statement in the police statement protocol against E;

1. Each statement of G and written estimate;

1. Each video of the instant video records, such as the police vehicles with the right door, police officers E’s photographs, interference with the performance of official duties, etc. [the defendant and defense counsel denies the charges of interference with the performance of official duties.]

However, it is clear that the defendant has exercised physical power, such as the facts charged, to police officers E, when the video recorded in the patrol box.

Police Officers E and G discovered the Defendant’s vehicle and set the patrol vehicle subsequent to the discovery of the Defendant’s vehicle, and at that time the Defendant accessed the right frame of the patrol vehicle.

Although testimony was made, the patrol car, after the vehicle of the defendant, get off the patrol car in his own vehicle.