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

1. On March 22, 2015, the Defendant violated his/her residence: (a) around 23:00, and (b) around 104, the Defendant went to the house of the victim C (the son, the son, and the 35 years old) of the Defendant’s friendly female job offers; and (b) went to the house after destroying her windows and entering the house.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victim's residence.

2. The Defendant, at around 19:00 on March 23, 2015, took a phone call from the former male-child room of the victim while drinking the victim and drinking at the victim’s house as described in paragraph (1) around 19:00, and took her head debt from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

3. On March 23, 2015, the Defendant: (a) reported that no contact was made at the place specified in paragraph (1) at around 21:50 on March 23, 2015; and (b) demanded the Defendant to leave the police box affiliated with the Ansan Police Station D police box called up after receiving a 112 report that the Defendant would not contact with him; (c) and (d) “

“Alongly sound and shouldered the chest part of the above E.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement by the police for C and E;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Articles 319 (1), 260 (1), and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

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

1. Determination on the application of sentencing guidelines for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act: Taking into account all the circumstances, such as the fact that there is no criminal history, and the fact that the degree of interference with the execution of official duties is not excessive, except for those subject to an application of fines not exceeding two times prior to the date 201;