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

On April 13, 2016, at around 01:40 on April 13, 2016, the Defendant stated that, in the report, F, who was dispatched to the place after receiving a report of 112 as a disturbance of one’s own drinking conduct, trying to investigate the situation of the case against one’s own daily conduct, the Defendant stated that F, who was dispatched to the place after receiving a report of 112 as a disturbance of one’s own daily conduct, shall be deemed to be a match that is not a separate one,” and thereafter, it should be considered to be determined by us, and the Defendant’s talk from the parties to the case.

“I amh, I amh, I do not amh, I amh, I amh, I amh. I amh to the F.

“In doing a bath theory as “,” and assaulted by sculping his battos.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the law of the police statement protocol to F;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 136 of the choice of punishment;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;