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

1. In light of the fact that at around 01:50 on December 5, 2015, the Defendant reported 3-4 persons around the Gangnam-gu Seoul (Seoul), the Defendant: (a) reported 112 to the victim C, the police officer called out after receiving the 112 report; and (b) the victim D, the police officer called out with the said C, who continued to be called out with the said C, should not be deemed to be Maur.

The victims were openly insulting, such as obsing a large interest.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, at the same time and place as above, is not a breath on the road.

“Around 112, the police box, the police officer affiliated with the Gangnam Police Station E police box called the victim C, who was called the victim’s face at one time with the victim’s fating fat.” under the influence of alcohol and without any particular reason, the victim’s face was fatd by fating the victim’s fatch.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate duties of police officers to prevent traffic hazards and to maintain order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to C and D;

1. Each complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (the details of CCTV images);

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), Article 311 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of each fine for a crime;

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. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the Defendant committed the instant crime under the influence of alcohol.

Therefore, it appears that there was a assertion to the effect that the defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness, and according to health and evidence, the defendant appears to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime. However, in light of various circumstances, such as the background of the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the defendant's act before and after the crime, the defendant has the ability or intent to discern things at the time of committing the crime in this case.