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

1. On October 6, 2017, at around 17:05, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the instant fishing goods store operated by the Victim C in Changwon-si, Changwon-si; (b) the Defendant found the said fishing goods store under the influence of alcohol while there is no good appraisal due to ordinary parking problems; and (c) caused the Plaintiff’s total market price of KRW 3,132,80 by cutting up two fishing times; and (d) 3 fishing times with a total of KRW 3,132,800, which is the victim’s ownership, by cutting off three fishing goods; or making a flaged.

2. On October 6, 2017, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties at the above fish-free shop, on the one hand, at around 17:10 on October 6, 2017, and on the one hand, after receiving a report from the host, as set forth in paragraph 1, and called the Defendant, to the circumstances belonging to the D District Unit of the Msan-dong Police Station, the Defendant: (a) Masan-dong Police Station: (b) Masan-dong; (c) Masan-dong; (d) Masan-dong; and (e) Man-do, she assaulted the Defendant, by taking one time

As a result, the defendant assaulted police officers and interfered with their legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F, C, G, and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs and estimates of damaged articles;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of destroying property and the choice of fines) concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties and the selection of fines);

1. The provision of the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act (the punishment shall be aggravated for concurrent crimes with the punishment determined by a crime of interfering with the execution of heavier public duties);

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order submitted a document stating that the defendant both led to the confession and reflects of the crime, the defendant's original agreement with C only with the victim of the crime of damage to property was not a punishment against the defendant, and E as well as E as the reason for the crime of obstructing the execution of official duties also submitted a document to the effect that E as part of the crime of obstructing the execution of official duties is a prior action against the defendant.