If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On December 12, 2015, the Defendant: (a) 112, 01:43 on the new franchis, which had a 2-2nd 26th fluor of the Suwon-si Si Man-si, the lower court: (b) 112 reported on the roads adjacent to the 1st apartment of the first apartment; and (c) on the front of the B fluor C, who called the Defendant at the site, sent to the scene, and tried to start the patrol and start the said vehicle, obstructed the departure of the said vehicle; (d) said D’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s fluor’s f.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of a fine for selective punishment (the fact that one's mistake is recognized and reflected, the first offender is a contingent crime under the influence of alcohol, and the damaged police officers compensate for damages to the defendant, and considering the fact that the damaged police officers want to take the action against the defendant, etc.);

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 334(1) or more of the Criminal Procedure Act.