The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

around 23:05 on April 8, 2018, the Defendants sent tobacco to K and L to the place of the police station of Mapo-gu Police Station, upon I’s 112 report while the Defendants had been working for the State I and the City I due to smoking in the “H” house located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G.

1. Defendant B’s interference with the performance of official duties at the above time and place, soliciting the police officer K to return home at the above time and place, and continue to take a bath to the police officer, and resisting the police officer, and selling the K’s left k’s 2-3 knife with her hand, and interfered with the police officer’s legitimate performance of official duties concerning the handling of the 112 reported case.

2. The Defendants’ insultd the victim K and L, who are the police officers called up as above, among many unspecified persons at the above time and place, and the Defendant A expressed his abusive theory, such as “a sprinking a sprink by the police”, and Defendant B made the victim’s insult by “a sprinking a sprink by the police”, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement made to K and I;

1. Application of CDs (Investigation Records No. 97 pages)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

A. Defendant A: Articles 311 and 30 of the Criminal Act; Selection of fines

B. Defendant B: Articles 311 and 30 of the Criminal Act (the points of insult) and Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and the selection of each fine

1. Defendant B who is subject to aggravated concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (to the extent that the aggregate of the amounts of the above two crimes is aggregated);

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Unfavorable circumstances against Defendant A: Defluence of a police officer on official duty, and circumstances that are favorable to the nature of the crime: The court of this case shows the attitude that recognized the crime of this case and reflects it, and there is no record of crime.