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

1. On January 12, 2019, the Defendant: (a) was deemed to have lost all belongings in a taxi while getting on and off a taxi operated by the victim B (66 years old); (b) the victim stopped the taxi in front of the Dobcheon Police Station D police box in Gyeonggi-si, B, 2019.

Although three police officers belonging to the above police box search all the above taxi bills, the defendant did not discover the defendant's belongings, and even though the victim demanded that "if you do not pay or pay a taxi, it would be good," the defendant continued to refuse to see "locating possession of belongings" and 10 minutes of unloading.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's taxi business by force.

2. On January 12, 2019, the Defendant arrested and taken custody of a flagrant offender under suspicion of interference with the above duties by the police officer assigned to the above police box, and then assaulted the police officer to the effect that “I do not have any belongings in a taxi,” from the slope E of the above police box to the effect that “I do not have anything in a taxi,” after hearing the horses to the effect that “I do not have anything in a taxi,” and assaulted the above E one time by taking advantage of Party A’s own drinking.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the police box service and the lawful execution of duties concerning the arrest of criminals.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statement of the defendant (which is made on the fifth trial date);

1. Each legal statement of witness B and E;

1. Application of receipts, public official identification certificates copies (E) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of each fine for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act Article 334(1) of the order of provisional payment is that the duration of the crime interfering with the business of this case has not yet lapsed, that the defendant recognizes and reflects his own crime, and that the defendant is 10 years.