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

On August 16, 2018, at around 03:00, the Defendant confirmed the situation by the police officers D, belonging to the Seoul Mapo Police Station C District Police Station, dispatched after receiving a report from a third party, that there was a disturbance caused by the Defendant’s family's fire on the roads in Mapo-gu Seoul, Seoul, the Defendant prevented the patrol vehicle from being used for the duty of response to the report 112, by making it possible for other 112 to take the patrol vehicle to respond to the report.

As such, the Defendant, who is a police official, interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of order of the above D, crime prevention, investigation, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the mobile phone photographing images [It is reasonable to deem that the act by the defendant obstructing the police officer from departing from patrol cars by performing the same act as the act of criminal facts constitutes the act of assaulting the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, as an indirect tangible force against

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. All of the circumstances indicated in the argument of the instant case, including the fact that police officers performing official duties for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act interfere with the performance of official duties by exercising force against police officers on the ground of sentencing, the degree of tangible force, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, career, and the background of the crime