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

On September 11, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 14:55, on the road in front of the Dog-si D Building parking lot, “a parking-prohibited sign is installed on the road, and it is difficult for the Defendant to pass the road.” On the road, the Defendant received a civil petition, and the Defendant: (b) removed illegal standing signboards from the site; (c) the luminous viewing E and the public officials affiliated with the Defendant collected illegal standing signboards and prevented the F from moving off the freight lane for the purpose of controlling the things on the road surface; and (d) sought to re-influorize the said standing signboards; and (c) the Defendant, in order for the F to remove the signboards again, expressed the desire to “the flue of the fe flag. Ga. Ba. Ba. Ba. Don Don Don Don Don Don,”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties on the illegal removal of the objects on the street by the public official of light viewing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and H;

1. Each description of the investigation report (E and result of processing a civil petition), the results of handling the matters requested by residents (or broad viewing E, April 2014, and May 2015);

1. Application of each video statute in relation to field photographs and photographs at the time of crackdowns ( April 9, 2015, and September 11, 2015), respectively;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Summary of the assertion

A. At the time of the instant case, the public officials in charge are carrying out administrative vicarious execution in accordance with Article 75 of the Road Act. In order to carry out vicarious execution, there must be a violation of the duty of alternative act by the administrative agency directly ordered by the law or by the order of the administrative agency based on the law, and the vicarious execution is not allowed for a

Even if the defendant puts up illegally on the road at the time, there was no fact that the road management authority ordered the defendant to perform the duty of transfer, etc. of the things placed on the road, so public officials in charge at the time of this case.