Defendants shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, only 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On July 18, 2016, at around 00:27, the Defendants arrested the friendly-gu I, who had drinking alcohol, such as the background F, background G, and Gyeong-gu, belonging to the E District of the Gwangju Mine Police Station E District, as a flagrant offender, and arrested the said police officer H as a flagrant offender committing insult against H. on the roads of “D” located in Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, and carried on the patrol vehicle.

Accordingly, Defendant A, while under the influence of alcohol, expressed a large voice to the effect that “I would be arrested as to what I would have done, I would have done. I would like to see the above F F's chest part by hand, and to prevent the above police officers from carrying I on the patrol vehicle, and to threaten the face of the above G in order to prevent them from carrying I.

Accordingly, Defendant B also joined the waste bags that were adjacent to the electric telegram, and turned the head part of the F in 2 times, and laid down the F in 200 and laid down the F in her hand.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to interfere with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to the arrest of flagrant offenders and criminal investigation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each statement made by each prosecutor of the suspect examination protocol against the Defendants

1. Each statement made by the police officer in relation to F, G, and H;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes stated in the investigation report (a photograph attached, such as the heat of vehicles making a criminal arrest);

1. Articles 136 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of each Criminal Act (a punishment shall be imposed for a punishment prescribed for the obstruction of performance of official duties against G with heavier concurrent crimes);

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is very poor in that the Defendants, on the grounds of the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, attacked police officers who are performing legitimate official duties, and assaulted them.

The initial attitude of the investigation should be criticized.

Defendant

A The number of criminal records of violence once is 1, and the defendant B is 3 times.