Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On February 28, 2015, at around 22:50, the Defendant reported 112 to the effect that customers do not pay the drinking value at a D restaurant located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Daejeon, Police Station E-gu, Daejeon, and Police Officer G (25 years of age) called “the drinking value” to the Defendant, and said F and G expressed that “the drinking value is paid to the Defendant and the house is called as “the house,” and said F and G wanted to take the right shoulder of the said F at one time, and that the said F and G wished to take the back seat by arresting the Defendant in the act of committing an act of committing an offense, respectively.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the handling of 112 reported cases by police officers and legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of H, F, and G;

1. Reporting on the arrest of a case;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged police officers;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Where an act of assaulting or threatening multiple public officials who perform the same duties as prescribed in Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act (a punishment stipulated for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties against more severe F) is committed, multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties are established according to the number of public officials who perform official duties, and where the above act of assault and intimidation was committed at the same place with the same opportunity at the same place, and it is evaluated as one act under the social concept, multiple crimes of obstruction of official duties are in a relationship of conceptual concurrence.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3505 Decided June 25, 2009). 1. Selection of selective fine for punishment

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the criminal defendant's act of sentencing is not good, but the criminal defendant should not reflect the crime and repeat the crime.