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

On July 20, 2017, the Defendant received a 112 report that the Defendant would avoid a disturbance under the influence of alcohol on the front side of the “C Multilater” located in Jin-si B at the time of Jin-si on July 20, 2017, and received a notice of penalty payment by drinking disturbance.

Defendant 1, upon boarding the patrol vehicle E, demanded the front of the patrol vehicle to block him and to leave the said patrol vehicle E, and subsequently, he saw the said patrol vehicle E to the effect that “I am feasia feasia” was “I am feasia” from the patrol vehicle, and her chest part of the said patrol E was pushed off one time by hand.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties of police officers regarding the maintenance of public order and notification.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made to E and F;

1. Application of statutes on the place of on-site photographs, inquiries about disposition of notice, the list of reported cases, and the place of work for the D District;

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

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

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant alleged that he was in a state of mental or physical weakness or mental loss under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. Thus, according to the records, the Defendant was aware of drinking at the time of committing the instant crime, but in full view of the circumstances such as the background and result of the instant case, the Defendant’s behavior before and after committing the crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion is rejected.

Although the nature of the crime is not weak due to the use of violence while breathing the police officer who is performing legitimate official duties for the reason of sentencing, it appears to be a contingent crime under the influence of alcohol.