Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On October 21, 2017, around 03:55, the Defendant: (a) confirmed the details of the report by the senior police officer D belonging to the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Western Police Station C police box, who was called up after receiving the report 112 on the front of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul; (b) committed assault, such as taking a bath to the said D; (c) taking the chest part on a hand, taking part of the chest part on a single stop; and (d) taking part of the buck part on a single stop.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the handling of damaged parts photographs, 112 reported cases;

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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 is that the defendant wears his uniform and uses force to police officers who perform official duties should be subject to criticism, and that the nature of the crime is not weak in light of the degree of tangible power exercised by the defendant, and that the defendant committed the crime in another case even though he was sentenced to a fine due to the recent crime of injury.

However, the punishment shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the fact that the defendant has a depth of mistake, and all kinds of sentencing factors, such as the age, sex, environment, etc. of the defendant.

The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case.

According to the records, although the defendant can be acknowledged that he was drinking at the time of the crime of this case, in light of the background leading up to the crime of this case, the means and method of the crime of this case, and the defendant's speech and behavior before and after the crime of this case, the defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

Since the above argument cannot be accepted, it shall not be accepted.