Defendant

A fails to pay the above fine.

Defendant

A The representative of the company called AD and the defendant B are employees of the company.

Defendants on August 4, 2015, on the grounds that, within the first floor F Office located in Pakistan, around 16:00 on August 4, 2015, the victim G who is a public official of the above F is not the victim’s name while requesting consultation related to the provision of street lamps to the victim G, who is not a public official of the above F,

“A sound brupted on the glass table where the victim sits together, 2 to 3 times, and Defendant B “A” is called “A”;

Along 50 minutes of public duty of the victim, it could be abandoned well, which interfered with the execution of official duties of the victim by using sound and intimidation.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel denied the crime under the purport that it was merely a telephone call to the public service center rather than a public official’s infinite attitude (or Defendant A) and the victim (Defendant B).

According to the evidence duly admitted by this court, each of the above actions committed by Defendant A and Defendant B is proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that the above actions by the Defendants exceeded the level of legitimate resistance and that the work within the F Office may be obstructed due to Defendant B's actions. Thus, the Defendants' respective arguments cannot be accepted).

1. The Defendants of the relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 136(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 334(1) or more of the Criminal Procedure Act.