If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

1. On December 21, 2015, the Defendant, at around 22:30 on December 21, 2015, was requested to pay parking expenses and return home from the police officer D, a police officer belonging to the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Police Station C District of Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu Police Station, who was called up after receiving a report from 112 that there was a person who was in a disturbance of drinking in the parking lot for B building in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Seoul, to return home.

“A police officer’s legitimate performance of duties relating to the investigation of crimes, maintenance of public peace, etc. was obstructed by assaulting the police officer’s chest by booming the breath of the breath with the breath hand, booming the breath of the police officer’s breath by hand, etc.

2. The Defendant damaged public goods by assaulting a police officer at the date and time, at a place specified in paragraph (1) at a place specified in paragraph (1), and arrested a flagrant offender for a crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, such as interference with the performance of official duties, and was escorted to the back seat of the E patrol vehicle used by the Seoul Young-gu Police Station C district unit of the Seoul Young-gu Police Station, Seoul, thereby damaging goods used by public offices by putting about KRW 307,316 of the said patrol vehicle’s back on several occasions to cover KRW 307,316 of the repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Written estimate;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the patrolr No. 24 of the Act;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of damaging goods for public use) and the selection of fines for the 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. The crime of this case with the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of the Aggravated Punishment Order was committed by the Defendant after having received a report that the Defendant assaulted the parking managers, and was arrested in the act of carrying the police officers during the patrol and was escorted at the same time, and the nature of the crime is not weak.

However, the defendant reflects his mistake, and is prior to that.