공무집행방해등
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
Defendant
If A does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
At around 00:10 on January 26, 2015, Defendant A knew that D, a daily fluor, was arrested as an insulting flagrant offender and was compelled to go to E district, and used the E district to find out the fact, and to use the F in the process of the E district, “I am, fy, am, fy, fy, refy, fy, fy, if any, refy, fyed, refyed, fyp, fyp, fyp, at his hand, at one time the chest part of the F, and the F in his body.
Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the maintenance of order and criminal investigation.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant A’s legal statement
1. The police statement concerning F;
1. A written statement of the G production;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on closure photographs;
1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines;
1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the provisional payment order shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the following circumstances.
The favorable circumstances: The facts of crime are recognized and reflected, the degree of the use of violence against police officers is relatively serious, and there is no record of criminal punishment other than the sentence of a fine of one million won on April 15, 1992 due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act on April 15, 1992; police officers do not want punishment against Defendant A; and other facts that the crime of this case is likely to have been committed by contingency under the influence of alcohol, and the rejection of prosecution, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, and conditions before and after the crime, etc.
1. Summary of each of the facts charged
A. At around 00:10 on January 26, 2015, Defendant A knew that D, a first executive, was arrested as a flagrant offender and was compelled to go to the E District, and found as the E District, and Defendant F, the victim of the E District, who was the victim of the E District, was the victim of the E District, who was the victim of the said D, B, i.e., “I, fus, fus, fus, fus, fus, and fus fus fumor, anywhere, to the contrary.”
B. Defendant B is the Defendant on January 2015.