If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

1. 업무 방해 피고인은 2018. 4. 17. 23:00 경 경북 칠곡군 C에 있는 피해자 D이 근무하는 E 편의점에서 자신의 일행이 음료수 대금을 지급한 것을 모른 채 피해자에게 신용카드를 내밀며 계산을 요구하였고 이에 피해 자로부터 ‘ 일행이 계산을 하였다’ 는 취지의 말을 듣자 아무런 이유 없이 " 씨발 년 아, 좆 같은 년 아, 뭘 꼬라 봐, 이 돼지 같은 년 아, 뭘 꼬라 봐 "라고 욕설을 하며 그 곳 카운터에 있던 복권 통을 집어 던지는 등 약 10분에 걸쳐 소란을 피웠다.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the convenience store business of the victim by force.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the above date, time, and place, and upon receiving an explanation from G, etc. from the staff G, etc. of the F District of the Maldong Police Station, who was dispatched to the site after receiving a report on the foregoing facts, and caused the Defendant to debrisate the instant situation, and “Choe, gue, gue,” and “the head, upon receiving the face and the chest part of G, pushed the chest part of G by hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the handling of 112 reported cases and the maintenance of public order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or G;

1. A H statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to internal investigation reports (in relation to the attachment of data fromCCTV), investigation reports (in the event of on-site photographs, etc.);

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 the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of the Aggravated Punishment Order is not somewhat weak, the fact that the defendant is led to confession and reflect, and the degree of assault against the victimized police officer is relatively minor and interfering with his duties.