When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

1. The Defendant, at around 22:00 on March 24, 2017, paid in a lump sum to the drinking value that had not been paid prior to the face value of the alcoholic beverage and the alcoholic beverage in the instant singing box E operated by the victim D (62 3,00) located in the Busan Young-gu, Busan High-do.

And I ordered alcoholic beverages and Haju.

However, in fact, the defendant did not possess cash or credit cards that can be settled under the actual official seal for up to one year at the time, and even if he was provided with alcoholic beverages and safe stocks from the injured party, he did not have the intent or ability to pay the price.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was provided 100,000 won in total from the place of the damage.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the same time and place as indicated in paragraph (1) at the same time and place as indicated in paragraph (1) 1, and as indicated in paragraph (1), G’s remarks to the police box working at the Busan Young-do Police Station F box in the Busan, Young-do Police Station, which confirms his personal information by having been called up to the 112 report, do not speak against G.

As a defect, the chests of G were tightly pushed, flabed once, flab, and flab, and flab.

As such, the Defendant interfered with police officers’ legitimate execution of duties concerning the dispatch of reports and criminal investigations.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or G;

1. Receipts:

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (No. 8 of the evidence list);

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), and the choice of fines, respectively, for the crime;

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 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Although the criminal liability of a police official with legitimate execution of duty after taking the reason for the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was not less than that of a crime by exercising violence against a police official with legitimate execution of duty, the fact that the error is recognized, and the fraud is against the law.