Defendant shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 1, 2018, at around 02:00, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the front front of the FF vehicle owned by the victim E, who proceeds from the project without any justifiable reason, while under the influence of alcohol on the road abutting on the D convenience store located in Jeju-si; (b) cut off the front of the said vehicle, and then cut off the front; and (c) cut down the part of the driver’s seat.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the property owned by the victim to be the repair cost.

2. On January 1, 2018, at the same place as before and after around 02:02, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the performance of official duties; (b) committed assault by the Defendant on the part of the Defendant, at the same time, at the seat of 112, such as that the Defendant destroyed or damaged the vehicles passing on as above; and (c) on the part of the Defendant, the head of Seo-gu Police Station G District, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoul who called up at the site, brought about the Defendant’s h’s h’s h’s hick, etc.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties by police officers on handling 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. A E-document;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

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

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

1. Among the various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument in this case, among the reasons for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, the following conditions are against: (a) reflects the following conditions; (b) have agreed to pay the amount agreed upon to the victims of property damage; (c) have raised three young children; and (d) currently has been in agricultural guidance in agricultural cooperatives; and (e) has been in office in agricultural guidance and may be dismissed in accordance with the personnel regulations if a person is sentenced to imprisonment without labor or heavier punishment: a new wall.