If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On November 10, 2017, the Defendant 23:43 around 23:43, 2017, when the police officer belonging to the Daegu Dong-gu Police Station D District, who was called to the site upon receiving a report that a drunk person avoided a disturbance, requested the Defendant to return home to the Defendant, the Defendant she spited the mobile phone used in his/her own hand toward the face of the above E, and displayed drinking, and the police officer F saw the Defendant, and the Defendant arrested him/her as a flagrant offender in the crime of interference with the performance of official duties.

After notification, spits, spits, etc. were assaulted on the face of defective E in the act of committing a crime.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

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. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The reasons for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, based on the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being in the period of suspension of execution; (b) the Defendant reflects the Defendant; (c) the Defendant did not have the same criminal record; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive for and circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence as ordered shall be determined in light of the sentencing