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

1. On March 18, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties in front of the “D” located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, on the street, E, etc., and committed assault, such as assaulting the right shoulder of G on one occasion, even though he was urged by G to be punished for interference with the performance of official duties, as he was expelled from G, which was called out after being reported 112, the F District Gyeong-gu Seoul, Seoul, the Police Station Mok-gu, Seoul, which was called out after being reported 112.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the handling of 112 reported cases.

2. From around 15:40 on the same day as the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, the Defendant was arrested by police officers such as the above G on charges of interference with the performance of official duties, and was detained in the F District above H located in the same Gu, and was under custody in the same F District. The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol to the police officers at the place where he was under the influence of alcohol.

D) A very rough and disorderly speech and behavior performed by police officers during about one hour, such as who is arbitra of the inside, who is not a son of a bitch, and who is not a bitch of a bitch of a bitch of a bitch of a bitch of a bitch.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Each written statement E and I prepared (the defendant is not memory under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime;

I asserts to the effect that he was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness.

In light of the records, although the defendant was aware that he had drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, it cannot be seen that he had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the fact that he had drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, the above assertion is rejected.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 3(3)1 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, and selection of fines for the crimes;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code of Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes;