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

On March 20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) in the House B No. 20:43 on March 20, 2018, in response to a 112 report to the effect that the Defendant would request the Defendant to produce at his house; (b) the police officer D and E, a police officer belonging to the House C District Police Station of the Seocheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, who visited the Defendant and moved at home; and (c) the Defendant was able to get on the patrol vehicle in order to get out after receiving another 112 report, and prevented the Defendant from blocking the front of the patrol while taking out his or her bath and blocking the front of the patrol vehicle if the patrol is to move.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the dispatch of report 112 by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (related to field images) and a criminal investigation report (related to a statement of shots);

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act - The crime of this case was prevented from patroling and obstructing the performance of official duties, thereby preventing police officers from being dispatched to another report. The nature of the crime is very poor.

- However, the defendant is not only about five minutes off patrols, and the degree of interference with the execution of official duties is somewhat minor.

I would like to say.

- The Defendant acknowledges and reflects wrongness.

In the investigation agency, the first attitude was that the person himself was detained, but the misunderstanding was recognized and the counter-influence was presented.

- The Defendant was subject to death by the victimized police officers, and the victimized police officers prepared a written application for no punishment.

- Other types of punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account the motive for the commission of the crime, the method of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the degree of interference with official duties