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

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 26, 2016, at around 17:30, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force by preventing other customers, who were in the restaurant, from entering the restaurant, by avoiding the Defendant from entering the restaurant, and allowing other customers, who were in the restaurant, from entering the restaurant, by having other customers, who were in the restaurant, who were in the restaurant, take a bath about about 20 minutes of the meal-friendly E and Si expenses.

2. On April 26, 2016, the Defendant obstructed D’s restaurant business by avoiding disturbance at the place specified in paragraph 1 of the same Article, and obstructed D’s restaurant business. However, even if the Defendant received a report on the foregoing content 112 and received a request from G superintendent of the police box affiliated with the police box of the Yanananananananannam Police Station, the Defendant refused to verify his/her personal information, and was arrested as a current offender interfering with his/her business, the Defendant was at the time when he/she was arrested as a current offender.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and the selection of fines for the crime;

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. Consideration for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, including the fact that the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act has no same record of force except for the case where he was punished once by a fine due to a violent crime;