If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

On May 15:35, 2018, the Defendant was boarding before the Busan Franchi Police Station C District, the Busan Franchi Police Station, which was located in Geum-gu B around May 15, 2018.

D When E, a police officer belonging to the above C Zone, who was called up after receiving a report while serving as a vision for failing to pay taxi expenses to the cab engineer, solicits the defendant to return home, he assaulted the elbow part of E by having elbow, and assaulted the victim F, who is the circumstance under which he belongs, to stop the defendant, i.e., “Nson’s superior;”

D. D. F. F. F. F. F. N. F. F. F. F. F. F.

“Along with the brush cited while taking a bath, the brush caused the victim to suffer approximately two weeks of treatment, resulting in the victim’s fingers, etc.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the prevention and control of crimes, and at the same time injured the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police statements made to E and F;

1. Application of statutes in a statement of intention;

1. Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the defendant asserted that he was a behavior at a defensive vehicle, but there was no danger or injury to the defendant, and the defendant reported the police officer to the police officer.

the defendant's action cannot be justified.

The reason for sentencing did not properly resolve the trial expenses between the defendant and the taxi engineer.

Considering that violence against police officers cannot be justified, and that at the time the defendant was unable to take action due to a large amount of alcohol, it was inappropriate for police officers to take action against the defendant and the taxi engineer.

shall not be deemed to have been approved.