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

피고인은 2016. 12. 4. 03:20 경 화성시 D에 있는 E 파출소 앞에서 ‘ 손님이 일어나지 않아 요금을 받을 수 없다’ 는 택시기사의 112 신고를 받고 출동한 화성 서부 경찰서 E 파출소 소속 경위 F이 행선지를 묻기 위해 피고인을 깨워도 일어나지 않다가 휴대폰 등 소지품이 있는지 확인하려고 하자, 눈을 뜨면서 택시 밖으로 나온 후 손으로 위 F의 배 부위를 1회 때리고, E 파출소 앞 화단에 소변을 보고 택시 안으로 들어가 앉아 있다가, 택시기사에게 요금을 묻고 있는 위 F에게 팔짱을 낀 채로 다가가 양 팔로 F의 목 부위를 1회 치고 몸으로 F을 수회 밀쳤다.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning criminal investigations by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes notifying departments related to 112 reporting of the case;

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Circumstances favorable to the defendant in sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act are as follows.

The defendant is deeply divided into and reflected in the crime of this case.

The defendant seems to have caused the crime of this case by drinking and contingently.

The extent of assault by the defendant against damaged police officers is relatively minor.

The defendant has no previous convictions of imprisonment.

It seems that the health of defendants is not good.

Circumstances unfavorable to the defendant are as follows:

Violence was exercised against victim police officers who had legitimate execution of their duties.

The damaged police officers were punished for the defendant.

Although the defendant has long passed, there is a history of criminal punishment for violence-related crimes.

In addition, the above circumstances are as follows.