Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won.

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

Punishment of the crime

On August 25, 2016, at around 23:00, the Defendant: (a) committed an act of assaulting F and F on the street in front of the D cafeteria located in Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; (b) on the ground that the Defendant did not wear a safety cap, which is an auxiliary police officer belonging to the E-police Station of the Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; and (c) did not comply with the demand to present an identification card; (d) did not comply with the demand to present an identification card; and (e) obstructed F with F and F on his hand by pushing the chest part of F on one occasion.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning assistance in the security of auxiliary police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The application of CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes to witness G 1.ctv-fags

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that "the defendant was regulated by the auxiliary police on the grounds that he violated traffic regulations related to the operation of Otoba, at the time and place stated on the facts of crime, and the place was the same as the place of business and intended to move the place to a place out of the early place of business. In this case, the defendant and his defense counsel acknowledged the fact that the chest part of the auxiliary police officer's chest was pushed about one time by hand, but it is difficult to regard it as an "Assault in the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties," and even if not, the above behavior of the defendant was committed in the process of responding to excessive suppression by the auxiliary police officer, and thus, it constitutes a "political act that does not go against social rules" and thus, it is dismissed.

2. In accordance with the degree, not only “the direct exercise of tangible power” for public officials, but also “the exercise of tangible power indirectly”, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is committed.