If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

1. On November 7, 2012, around 22:40, the Defendant made a 112-report in front of the goings of the Seosan subway Station No. 5, the Seosan Station located in Busan Seosan-gu, Busan. On the other hand, the Defendant made a dispute with the taxi engineer and the career selection issues, and subsequently offered that “the victim B and C, a police officer called upon receiving the report, attempted to return to the police officer without having to go back to the rapid way.” However, without taking particular measures against the taxi engineer, the Defendant made an accusation against the administrative agency, while informing the Defendant that “if there is a complaint to use the taxi, an accusation is made to the administrative agency” while informing the Defendant that “if there is a complaint to use the taxi, it shall be made to the Defendant, who is the owner of the vehicle, and D and his name missculed, who are the taxi engineer, expressed the victim publicly insulting the victim at several times, “I am the Chewing spambro.”

2. The Defendant informed the Defendant of the slope B, who was a police officer belonging to the Busan Urban Police Station E Zone, Busan Urban Police Station E Zone, who was called upon 112 report as above, and was about to take a patrol vehicle, and the Defendant: (a) opened a driver’s seat to get on the driver’s seat and opened a driver’s seat; (b) opened the driver’s seat door and pushed off the part of the driver’s seat; and (c) obstructed a slope B from getting on the patrol vehicle; and (d) obstructed the Defendant from getting on the patrol vehicle; and (e) there was a gap between the sloping B with the head of the steering police station and the police station in order to increase the Defendant’s failure and request the support to the police station; and (e) there was a gap between the sloping B and C, who opened the steering gun to get on the captain of the patrol, and caused C to interfere with C’s legitimate performance of duties by getting C’s physical failure to perform the patrol on the part of the guard, and obstructing C’s performance of duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each police statement statute to B, D, and C;

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment