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

피고인은 2019. 2. 18. 05:37경 인천 부평구 B에 있는 C 입구에서 ‘남성 3명이 싸우고 있다’는 신고를 받고 출동한 인천부평경찰서 D지구대 소속 경찰공무원인 순경 E이 피고인과 F의 싸움을 말린다는 이유로 위 E의 복부 부위를 왼발로 1회 걷어찼다.

Therefore, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of official duties concerning the suppression of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of notification of on-site photographs and 112 reports;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136 of the same Act concerning criminal facts, the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant's act on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is likely to be criticized in that not only prevents police officers from maintaining the order of police officers, but also can promote light of legal order and public authority.

However, the defendant is currently recognizing and opposing his mistake.

There shall be no criminal history exceeding a fine against a defendant.

In addition to this, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, degree of exercise of force against police officers, and circumstances revealed in the trial process shall be determined as ordered by considering all the circumstances.