A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 4,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 2,000,000, respectively.

The Defendants respectively.

1. Defendant A at around November 24, 2015, at the main point of the trade name “E” operated by D located in Special Self-Governing City of Sejong, Metropolitan Autonomous City C, the Defendant was forced to check the circumstances, etc. of the instant case from G, who was dispatched after receiving a report of 112 due to the suspicion of assaulting D, and obstructed the legitimate execution of the said G’s official duties concerning the suppression of crime by taking the chest of the said G on one occasion at the time of drinking, while taking a bath to the said G.

2. Around November 24, 2015, Defendant B waiting in order to undergo an investigation on suspicion of assaulting I et al. in the F District located in the Special Self-Governing City of Sejong, Metropolitan Autonomous City H on the following occasions, Defendant B damaged public goods at repair cost by destroying one string of the strings on the strings on the strings without any particular reason so that approximately KRW 300,000 can be said to be more than KRW 30,000 as repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. On-site and photographs of damage (33, 34, 35 pages of investigation records);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the receipt of the printer;

1. Article 136(1) (Selection of Penalty) of the Criminal Act and Article 136(1) (Selection of Penalty): Defendant B: Article 141(1) (Selection of Penalty Penalty) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Defendant A, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, has no record of criminal punishment by taking into account the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment other than twice of a fine imposed on Defendant A (On the other hand, Defendant B had a previous record of suspended execution).