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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 24, 2019, at around 13:15, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s multiple operation by force for about 30 minutes, such as: (a) the Defendant asked the victim D, who is an employee, to take a toilet; (b) the Defendant took a bath, and (c) the Defendant took a bath to the victim; and (b) the Defendant interfered with the victim’s multiple operation by force for about 30 minutes.

2. At around 13:45 on the same day, the Defendant continued to be arrested as a flagrant offender with obstruction of business even though the Defendant received the above D’s 112 report and received a request from F to withdraw from the above multi-face, who was called out after having received the above D’s 112 report, and received a request from F to leave the said multi-face, the Defendant committed assault against the left face of the said F one time.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in regard to the handling of 112 reported cases and arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Police statements of D;

1. Each investigation report [Judgment as to the assertion about the obstruction of performance of official duties] asserts that the defendant did not have any intention to obstruct performance of official duties as follows.

- The Defendant shall not use well the right side of his body on the stroke.

At the time of arrest, police officers have gone through the face of police officers in the process of plucking, plucking, etc. of the defendant's arms.

According to each of the above evidence, it is acknowledged that the defendant resisted to the arrest of the defendant, and the police officer made the arms face, and that the police officer exceeded the left side part of the gun, and that the police officer was exempted from the inside, and that the defendant's intention of obstructing the performance of official duties is recognized as long as the defendant did so to the police officer who intends to arrest him/her, as he/she did so.

The above assertion is not accepted.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;