Where a defendant fails to pay a fine, one hundred thousand won shall be the day.

On July 24, 2018, the Defendant: (a) received a report from the third floor of the Defendant of the building in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, around July 23:38, 2018; and (b) received a report from 112 to the effect that “any accident may arise due to the collapse of the door,” and called up to the slope D belonging to C Zone attached to the front road of the building and called up to the Defendant.

The term “I” is so large as to be, and the slope D has been in the C District.

"Defects," and plastic paintings stored in the third floor stairs were sloping D.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

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. The punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act; and (b) the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (c) the circumstances after the crime.

D. Unfavorable circumstances: Crimes that interfere with the performance of official duties are detrimental to the function of the state's legal order and require strict punishment; the defendant's identity, such as asking a police officer for the position of the police officer, is confirmed, and the crime was committed, and the fire on the third floor of the building could have been destroyed by serious damage to the police officer.

A favorable circumstance: The defendant's wrong recognition and the attitude of reflectivity appears, and the first offender who has no criminal history.

(k) The person appears to have committed an contingent crime under the influence of alcohol.