Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On October 30, 2016, the Defendant: (a) at the D District of the Seocheon-gu Police Station D in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul on October 30, 2016; (b) on the ground that the Defendant’s female-friendly E was investigated by suspicion of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving on Drinking); (c) on the ground that the Defendant’s female-friendly E was investigated by a police officer

It interfered with the investigation of E with the noise of "Ara with mobile phones", and the police officers belonging to the above D's team were able to boom F while obcing to the police officers belonging to the D's team.

After receiving notification of penalty payment due to the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act by G in the circumstances belonging to the above D District, the Defendant expressed that “I ambling, the name of the bomb, the bomb, the death of the bomb, the death of the bomb, and the death of the bomb, not the head of the police station. I ambling that I ambling, I ambling, I ambling, I am off the bomb and I ambling.”

As a result, the defendant has interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officials in relation to the management of global guard affairs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement concerning G in the police statement protocol;

1. Application of each video statute of the victim's photograph and CD (CCTV recording content) to each video statute;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 136 of the choice of punishment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act of the order of provisional payment is that the defendant prices a police officer in the state of drinking and the nature of the crime is poor; the police officer wants to punish the defendant's strict punishment; on the other hand, the defendant asserts that the police officer mentioned in the family history of the defendant who is a mother's family, was committing a crime; on the video of CD (CCTV recording content), even if it is based on the video of the CD (CCTV recording content), it is confirmed that the defendant's face to commit a crime against a police officer on his own, and that the defendant's degree of interference with the performance of official duties is significant.

. does not seem to exist;