Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 01:00 on June 25, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s main business operation by force by avoiding disturbance for about 10 minutes, by receiving a solicitation to return home from the same as the company manual, while drinking alcohol together with the company manual at the main point of “D” operated by the victim C, which was operated by the victim C, and thereby neglecting the customer’s main business operation by a threat to avoid disturbance for about 10 minutes.

2. On June 25, 2016, at around 01:23, the Defendant damaged the object for public use, as prescribed in paragraph (1), to ensure that the repair cost is KRW 143,00,00, by walking the back glass of the patrol vehicle on the front of the said patrol vehicle, while boarding the G patrol vehicle at the front of the said patrol vehicle, after being arrested as a flagrant offender by interfering with the performance of duties, such as obstruction of duties by the F, etc. of the position belonging to the Sungdong Police Station E District Police Station, dispatched after being reported 112.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of H, I, and C prepared;

1. The standing part, the body part and the damaged photograph;

1. 112 reported statements;

1. Each written agreement and certificate of confirmation (related to the damage to public goods and the change thereof);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 141 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 314 (1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Violations to Public Use and Selection of Fine)

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

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order takes into account the fact that the defendant interfered with the main business of the victim C, damaged the glass window of the patrolr dispatched to the scene, etc., which is disadvantageously considered as the sentencing factors, such as the fact that the criminal liability is heavy. The defendant is committed in the confession of all the crime, and is against the defendant, and the investigative agency agreed with the victim C, reimburses the repair cost of the patrolr, and reimburses the repair cost of the patrolr with favorable sentencing factors.