In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, each of them is 100.

1. Defendant A’s property damage around March 22, 2015: (a) around 06:30 on the street in front of the building in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City; and (b) on the ground that a dispute was brought about with Defendant B, etc., who was parked around the surrounding area, and damaged the repair cost to KRW 150,000.

2. On March 22, 2015, the Defendants’ obstruction of performance of official duties obstructed police officers’ prevention, suppression, and investigation of crimes, public peace and order by assaulting Defendant A and Defendant C together with the police officers’ clothes, and obstructing the lawful performance of duties concerning police officers’ prevention, investigation, and maintenance of order and order. The Defendants, G, police officers, and H, who were affiliated with the F District Police Station of Seoul Mine-gu, Seoul, to report the above crimes committed by Defendant A, and attempted to arrest Defendant A as a flagrant offender. Defendant B, “I am flick. I am flick in their birth. I am flick. I am back with the police officers’ clothes.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The written statement by each police officer of G and H;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Victim G photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photograph property damage;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Article 366 of the Criminal Code of Defendant A (a point of causing property damage)

B. Articles 136(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act of the Defendants (the obstruction of performance of official duties)

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (Mutual Crimes of Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties);

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Defendant A from among concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The defendants of the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act reflects the same criminal records and mistakes.

It is not limited to the degree of violence against police officers, and is sentenced to the same punishment as the order in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the age of the Defendants, relationship between the Defendants and the circumstances leading to the commission of the crime.