If the defendant does not pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be the day.

1. On November 29, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 01:00 on November 29, 2013, the Defendant: (b) caused the loss of property by drinking the hand-on box, etc. installed at the store where the Plaintiff 8,00 won of the market price while drinking alcohol together with the E-place toilets for the operation of the victim D in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon; and (c) caused the loss to the effect of keeping the hand-on box, etc. installed at the store where the Plaintiff 76,00 won of the market price.

2. On November 29, 2013, the Defendant was subject to the control over the arrest of flagrant offenders in relation to I and J’s body fightings, the main employees of the Busan Police Station, and the Defendant, the Defendant, on November 29, 2013, at the front of the Eju located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, with 112 reported as an assault incident that occurred within the main points.

The Defendant attempted to stop a bath body and fighting from G, and attempted to do so, and when he was subject to governance, the Defendant assaulted twice the chest part of G in both hands, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the arrest of a flagrant offender by assaulting, such as the defect that H attempted to arrest J as a flagrant offender, the defect that H attempted to arrest his chest part of H as a flagrant offender, and the h’s chest part of H’s chest part by hand, which was pushed up one time and being pushed up, and thus having interfered with the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to DGH

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 70 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014); Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the provisional payment order are the initial crime, contingent crime, recovery of the degree of damage and the death of the sources of punishment (the crime of causing damage) and the police officers who suffered damage to death and deposit (the crime of obstructing performance of official duties).