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

1. On January 29, 2015, at around 22:00, the Defendant damaged the victim E-owned property by walking the main staff at the “C” point located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and by arresting the police officer as a flagrant offender from the police officer D due to the suspicion of insulting the police officer, on the ground that the fire occurred.

2. On January 29, 2015, the Defendant: (a) at the G police box located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F on the 22:56th day of the performance of official duties; (b) even after being arrested and detained as a flagrant offender for suspicion of assault, etc. as above, the Defendant was subject to control by the said D; (c) the part of the said D’s distribution was flicked by the Handphone, which was flicked by the Defendant, once.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of police officers in flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (to hear statements from victims of damage to property);

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment (such as the details of the crime, degree of violence, the fact that the victim of damage to property does not want the punishment, and the fact that the mistake is divided, circumstances after the crime and the fact that there is no history of punishment, etc.);

1. Of 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. Part concerning the dismissal of prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. On January 29, 2015, the Defendant, at the main point of “C” located in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul around 22:00, expressed the victim’s insult, who is the circumstances leading up to the submission of the assault report, to the victim D, who is the circumstances leading up to the Defendant’s religious police box called out after receiving the assault report, and among the aforementioned main customers, expressed the victim’s desire to “gy, Chewing gue, and ring.”

2. Determination:

(a) An offense subject to victim's complaint (Articles 311 and 312 (1) of the Criminal Act);

B. On May 20, 2015, after the institution of this case was instituted.