If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

On March 22, 2015, at around 19:20, the Defendant assaulted “Eju” operated by Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (Ga, 38 years of age) with the drinking value, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the prevention and suppression of police officers’ crimes by assaulting “Eju”, which is operated by Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C (Ga, 38 years of age), with both hand, the Defendant pushed off the parts of D’s chest. The police officer G, who was dispatched after receiving 112 report, controlled the Defendant’s above act, and the police officer G, who was dispatched to the Seoul Young-gu Seoul Metropolitan Police Station on the F District 112, prevented the Defendant from carrying out the act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to D and G

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the same Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines (including the degree of obstruction of performance of official duties, and the absence

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

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. On March 22, 2015, at around 19:20 on March 2, 2015, the Defendant assaulted the victim of the “Eju” operated by the victim D (V, and 38 years of age) located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, with the drinking value problem, with both hand and with the victim’s breast part, which was pushed against the table.

2. The facts charged in this part of the judgment are the crimes falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the express will of the victim under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

However, according to the records, the victim expressed his/her intent that he/she agreed with the defendant and that he/she does not want to punish the defendant after the prosecution of this case was

Therefore, this part of the prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.