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

On January 12, 2019, at around 06:42, the Defendant was seated at the back of the taxi without paying the taxi fee from C Sari, front of the taxi platform located atHanam-si, and the Defendant tried to open a door to the front of the taxi on the same day when he was called up after receiving a 112 report by the light captain E belonging to the D Zone at the Hannam Police Station D Zone, which was called up for the 112, while he was getting out of the taxi, on the same day as he was getting out of the taxi at the front of the Felon of the Hanam-si at around 07:0 on the same day when he was getting out of the taxi, and followed the Defendant.

Accordingly, the above E set up a patrol car, and the Defendant set up a son and the Defendant “friend young son,” and assaulted the above E with a strong frist part.

In this way, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (at the call of a taxi engineer and the statement of witness);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine concerning the crime;

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

1. The degree of violence of reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not focus on the provisional payment order, the fact that there is no record of the same kind of crime, and the record of punishment of the crime is only once, confessions and reflects, and other conditions of sentencing indicated in the record, such as the defendant's age, occupation, character and conduct, family relationship, living environment, circumstances leading to the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined in the same manner as the order