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

around 00:30 on October 13, 2016, the Defendant: (a) placed a chief window at the patrol vehicle in front of the 129-party c, who works as a hub at a place in front of the 129-party c, and (b) expressed a desire for the police officer B of the Mosung-dong Department B, a patrol vehicle within the patrol vehicle to get off from the said patrol vehicle; and (c) “I want to get back our house.”

Patama, the test of which is held by Nata in order to do so;

whether or not.

The term "the sound was flabed by cutting "the flab", and flabing C with his body, and flabing C.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the suppression and prevention of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. A written statement of reference to D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (packers E or F telephone statement hearing);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136 of the same Act concerning the crime, the selection of fines;

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

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with regard to the order of provisional payment, assaults a police officer who performs duties in uniform and thereby causes damage to the public authority with respect to the enforcement of the Act.

The Defendant was subject to three times or punishment due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act from 2012 to 2014, and even if he could sufficiently recognize his abnormal behavior in his own state, he once again performed the instant crime. However, the Defendant did not have the same criminal record as the Defendant did.

The Defendant committed the instant crime by contingently, and reflects on the crime.

In addition, the defendant's age, sex, motive and background of the crime, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, records of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the records, shall be determined by the same sentence as the order.