If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

At around 02:50 on July 5, 2013, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties, such as assaulting the victim’s bridge by using the victim’s voice “I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I ambling the victim’s bridge.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F and G;

1. Statements of witnesses H and E in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A written statement of F and G;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a copy of the work log and police identification card of the D Zone, a part, etc. of the D Zone 23, a patrol car of the D Zone 23, and a patrol car of the D Zone 15, which were assaulted by a suspect;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion was that the police officer attempted to force the Defendant, a traffic accident victim, into the earth, and did not assault the police officer. The police officer’s duty performance by the police officer at the time of the instant case is not recognized.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by each of the above evidence, namely, that the defendant stated in this court that he was likely to contact the body of E, that the defendant's statement from the defendant was specific and consistent in relation to the circumstances where the defendant was assaulted and the defendant was arrested as an offender in the act of committing an act of committing an offense, and thus it is difficult to readily reject its credibility, and that the witness at the time of the instant case stated to the effect that the defendant was sent to E, that the witness at the time of the instant case also stated to the effect that the police officer sought to force the victim of a traffic accident as the victim of the traffic accident.