Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 22, 2016, the Defendant: (a) reported on August 22, 2016, 05:30, in the 112nd sentence of the cooking and Eup’s office located in Seocheon-ro, 47-3, the Defendant: (b) reported on August 22, 2016, that “A person under the influence of alcohol is diving on the road”; (c) the security guards belonging to the Pakistan Police Station B, who was called to the said site, and security guards, discovered the Defendant who was diving on the road; and (d) caused the Defendant’s face of the said C on one occasion with his own drinking; (c) the Defendant’s face was taken once as the head of the defect in which he attempted to board the patrol; and (d) even after getting on the back seat of the patrol seat, considered the head of the said C, who was seated on the chief of the said patrol police station.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the maintenance of police officers' order and legitimate execution of duties concerning 112 reported duties.

2. The Defendant damaged property by putting 500,000,000 won of the market value of the victim’s possession, who was worn by the victim C, in his/her possession at the above date and place, and destroying the victim’s property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing performance of official duties), Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines for the crime;

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

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

1. Circumstances that are disadvantageous to the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act: The obstruction of performance of official duties by itself cannot be deemed to be disadvantageous to the case, and the nature of the crime is bad in light of the method and content of the crime.

In addition, the defendant committed the crime of causing property damage to the victim.

The favorable circumstances: the defendant is against the defendant, and is the first offender.

Compensation for damage to property damage crime was made.

In addition, the records and trials of this case, such as the age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances after crimes, etc. of the defendant.