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

No person shall interfere with rescue, transfer, first aid or medical treatment of an emergency patient by emergency medical personnel by means of violence, intimidation, deceptive scheme, force or other means.

Nevertheless, around 22:06 on February 12, 2019, at the C Hospital emergency room located in Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Defendant took a bath to the victim D, who is a doctor under the influence of alcohol, and took a bath to the nurse at that room, and took a bath to the nurse at that place, and interfered with the treatment of the victim's emergency patient for about 30 minutes by force, such as threatening to threaten the patient as he or she is on duty and staff.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements prepared in D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on photographs by filing an investigation report (the CCTV image in the emergency room of a C hospital), or by cutting down the C hospital emergency room ctv video;

1. Article 60 (2) 1 and Article 12 of the Emergency Medical Service Act concerning facts constituting a crime and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is a case where the defendant sent to an emergency room for the treatment of the wife suffering from drinking alcohol, by exercising his/her desire or force, interferes with the medical treatment of emergency medical personnel. Such crime is highly likely to be criticized in that other patients in an emergency are deprived of the opportunity to receive the best treatment.

In addition, the defendant had been punished several times for the same kind of crime, such as violence, interference with business, damage to property, etc., in light of the circumstances of the crime in this case, it appears that the main crime in this case was committed, and it was committed without being aware of it even during the suspension period.

However, when the defendant comes to this court, it seems that the defendant's mistake and reflects it.

Since 200, there was no penalty force exceeding fines for about 15 years since 200, and there was considerable time after the crime of property damage in 2006.