Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 1, 2014, at around 01:15, the Defendant used alcohol in front of the D Hospital located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and demanded F, a police officer belonging to the Seoul Mapo Police Station E District District, who was called out after receiving a report, to sleep and return home. As such, the Defendant assaulted F, by drinking the left side of the said F one time, with his own head, thereby obstructing F’s legitimate execution of duties on public security, public safety, and maintenance of order.

In addition, the Defendant assaulted the victim G (the age of 30) who is a police officer belonging to the E District Unit, to walk down the victim's right knee away from the knee to the right side, and obstructed the legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of public security and order of police officers, and at the same time, obstructed the victim's legitimate performance of duties concerning the maintenance of public security and order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The statement of each police officer made to F and G;

1. F Assault photographs and photographs of the upper part of G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Attachment of medical certificates);

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (the crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties againstG and the crimes of injury, and the punishment imposed on the crimes of serious injury);

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

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

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

1. The act of exercising violence against police officers who are performing legitimate official duties for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is not good enough to view their public authority. However, the defendant's mistake is divided, there is no criminal power, the defendant made a deposit for the police officers who suffered the injury, and the defendant's family members and branch members are the defendant's preference.