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

On October 4, 2018, at around 21:45, the Defendant: (a) received a report on 112 statement that “the Defendant would have been drinkinged” in front of the Songpa-gu Seoul building, and sought to return home to the head of the police station affiliated with the Seoul Songpa Police Station C District Zone C, which called the Defendant, as if he were to spawd, and spawd, and spawd, “I can immediately live, spawd, and die,” and (b) heard the warning that “the police officer may be punished for obstruction of performance of official duties if he assaults a police officer” from the above D, the Defendant spawddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd by his f

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 of D police statement;

1. Damage photographs;

1. Application of the video CD-related statutes;

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the crime is not good, such as when the defendant was a police officer in charge of legitimate performance of official duties, and breath, etc.

However, the defendant's mistake is recognized and divided, and the fact that there is no criminal power except once a fine for this paper shall be considered as favorable circumstances, and the defendant shall be sentenced to the punishment like the order.