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

1. On September 30, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 18:00, the victim D (54 tax) located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City around September 30, 2017, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s operation of the restaurant by force, and obstructed the victim’s operation of the restaurant by avoiding disturbance for about 10 minutes on the part of the victim, including: (b) the victim D (54 tax); (c) the Plaintiff, while drinking alcohol and the vision for drinking alcohol; and (d) the Plaintiff, by cutting off the table, dump to the bottom of the hospital; and (c) the Defendant dumping the kn

2. On September 30, 2017, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, on the 19:30s, arrested the police officer on the charge of obstruction of duties, etc. at the G police box located in the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and was sitting in the seat of the suspect, and without any justifiable reason, assaulted the police officer, such as, “Is the spit, embling, flapsing, flapsing, and flapsing,” and continuing to spit on the floor of the police box, which was the police officer of the said box, from the slope H (44 years old), flaping the flaps of H.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police boxes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or H;

1. A report on investigation (a statement by a wooden person);

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 316(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties), 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. Although it is not good in terms of assaulting a police officer to wear a uniform for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, considering all the circumstances including the following: (a) the Defendant reflects his mistake; (b) the Defendant agreed with the victim of interference with business; (c) there is no criminal history; and (d) the Defendant’s forced departure from the Republic of Korea by sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for residing in Korea with his/her spouse and children, it seems somewhat harsh.