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

On June 21, 2019, at around 04:23, the Defendant, on the street of Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, tried to board a patrol boat, who was reported by a 112 taxi engineer that “no loss will occur” and was demanded by a policeman affiliated with the Incheon Yeonsu Police Station C District Unit of the Incheon Yeonsu Police Station, who was called to go home from D, and the above D prevented him from doing so, she spited the above D, and spit it.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A E-document;

1. Investigation report (on-site exit status and details of entrance);

1. 112 reported matters;

1. Application of statutes to photographs of victimized police officers;

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. In light of the fact that the Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, committed the instant crime without being aware of the offender during the period of repeated crime, and that the form of obstruction of the performance of official duties of this case is bad, there is a need for strict punishment against the Defendant.

However, the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, the environment, motive, means and result of the crime, etc., are considered as follows: (a) there is no criminal record of obstruction of performance of official duties; (b) the defendant's mother appears in the court; (c) the defendant's mother appears in the court; and (d) the defendant's mother appears in the defendant's appearance and guidance to the defendant;