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

On March 24, 2017, at around 03:30, the Defendant: (a) performed an act of drinking and sprinking the victim’s face in the police station E team belonging to the Changwon-gu Police Station: (b) having been urged to return home from the victim F of the said F on the ground that he was reported that he was sprinking a disturbance at the drinking house, before the Seongbuk-gu Police Station: (c) around 03:30 on March 24, 2017; and (d) had the victim’s head, who was under the control of the police station box of the Changwon-gu Police Station: (a) had the victim’s head; and (b) had the victims continue to have sprinked the victim, and (c) had the victim sprinked for sponsing.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention and suppression of crimes, public peace and maintenance of order of victims who are police officials.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement concerning G and F;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. On April 1, 2016, when the defendant selected a sentence was sentenced to a fine two times due to a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, etc., and the court was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, etc., and committed the instant crime without being sentenced to the suspended sentence, the nature of the crime is not good. However, the defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a contingent state, and the defendant is showing to have committed the instant crime in depth while making a confession. The degree of the assault of the defendant at the time of the instant case and the degree of damage suffered by the victimized police officers do not focus on the degree of the assault of the defendant at the time of the instant case and the degree of damage inflicted by the victimized police officers, and F wanted the Defendant to

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;