If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Some of the facts charged were corrected.

At around 15:00 on August 28, 2019, the Defendant resisted that the construction was executed at the Sungnam-si Office Construction Division, which was located in Sungnam-si, to remove the street room on the same day as that of the said construction, and took a bath, and then pushed the victim D (the age of 35) who is an administrative officer in charge of the said construction and the administrative officer into drinking for about 14 days, and put the victim on a scam for approximately 14 days in need of medical treatment, and from the victim E who was the victim of Grade 6, the Defendant saw that the victim “h is fluort with the government office, and is fluort with the public official.” The Defendant saw that “h is flusium, flusium, team leader, and fluort with the victim.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the performance of duties concerning the maintenance, repair, and management of small rivers by public officials of the Gu office, and at the same time injured the victim D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and D;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a medical certificate of injury, a damaged photograph (27 pages of investigation records), a photograph at the control site (29 pages of investigation records);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is as stated in its reasoning, the defendant found in the Gu office and she set a sound on the ground that the defendant removed the street points operated by the shot site, and she saw the chest of a female public official who met it as a drinking once, thereby causing an injury of two weeks per share, and assaulted by a male public official who makes it a claim against it.

This is mainly considered in light of the circumstances, but the defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect the error, and the defendant resisted the removal of the street store.