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

1. On June 25, 2018, at around 21:44, the Defendant: (a) committed an error in performing an blick operation by the Defendant against the victim D (21) who was an employee of the C Hospital’s emergency department located in Osan-si B; (b) the Defendant was a staff member of the C Hospital’s emergency department in charge of receipt.

Although the victim was able to take care of the victim's intention, it interfered with the receipt of the emergency room of the victim's above hospital by force by avoiding the disturbance between about 25 minutes, such as a defect caused by the victim's diagnosis and treatment on the following day, and a large sound.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, at the above date, at the above time, and at the above place, the Defendant interfered with the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the prevention of crime and the maintenance of order by gathering cell phones F, a slope F, who was affiliated with the E District Police Station E District of the Sungdong Police Station, in order to take the Defendant’s continuous disturbance as a mobile phone, by gathering cell phones from the cell phone one time to take the face of slopeF.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to CDs (a hospital office and CCTV), video reproduction CDs (a video reproduction CDs)

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the selection of fines concerning criminal facts;

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was that the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for one year and six months due to a crime using a deadly weapon in 2006 and by using violence. On December 2, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1 million due to interference with business affairs, etc., and was subject to a fine of KRW 1 million on 12 or a fine, but again, committed the instant crime. The Defendant committed the instant crime in the emergency room only by requesting the emergency room to harm the prescription without expert’s judgment.