If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

1. On October 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) destroyed and damaged property by breaking the c apartment management office located in Busan Metropolitan City B on October 30, 2012; (b) under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant destroyed and damaged, without any reason, approximately KRW 129,000 of the market price of the clelelebs managed by the head of the above management office D.

2. On October 31, 2012, the Defendant committed assault, such as 00:15, at the C apartment parking lot located in Sinsan City B, the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender from the slope F (the age of 40) of the police box affiliated with the Gyeongsan Police Station Emb, which was dispatched to the scene after receiving a report on the above Defendant’s act, and assaulted the above F F by taking a bath and walking the B’s bridge on three occasions.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of police officers in the act of committing a crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement concerning G and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (referring to photographs, estimate calculation and sales slips attached);

1. Relevant Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing performance of official duties, the choice of fines), and Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of destroying and damaging property and the choice of fines)

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

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

1. The crime of this case committed by the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is favorable to the defendant, such as the damage to another person's property, assaulting a police officer to restrain it and obstructing the performance of official duties, and the nature of the crime is not good. The defendant separates and reflects the errors, agreement with the victim of the damage of property, the degree of violence of obstruction of performance of official duties is not much serious, and there is no record of criminal punishment.

In all the above circumstances, the motive, background, means and methods of the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the instant crime, and the age of the Defendant as shown in the instant argument.