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

On March 27, 2017, the Defendant: (a) reported around 04:35 on May 27, 2017 that he was drunkly drunk in front of the Manan-gu Manan-si B; and (b) sent out to the site, the Defendant: (c) informed the Defendant of his house, or changed his identification card; (d) informed the Defendant of his house to the house; (c) made the defective Party Party A of the identification card; and (d) expressed his desire to engage in an act to fright the drinking; and (d) threatened the Defendant with the act to fright the fright of the fright of this fright of this fright of this fright of this fright of this fright of this fright of this fright of this fright of fright of this fright of this fright of fright; and (e) assaulted the fright of the fright of this f

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act - Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, Etc. - Unfavorable circumstances: The nature of the crime committed by the police officer to assist the defendant under the influence of alcohol and to safely return to the police officer is not good. - The favorable circumstances: recognition of the crime by the defendant, reflects his mistake, and the