Defendant

A A shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 1 million won.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 6, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received 112 report that the instant assault case occurred in front of the “Dcafeteria” located in Kuju-si; and (b) was asked to ask questions about the circumstances of the instant case from the F in charge of the region belonging to the Kuju Police Station E District Unit, which called for, Defendant A committed assault, such as talking to the said F without any justifiable reason, booming the said F, booming on the chest and on the part of the chest and on the part of the mother.

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

2. Defendant B, as described in paragraph (1) at the same date, time, and place as indicated in paragraph (1), sent patrol cars to the scene after receiving 112 reports as described in paragraph (1). Defendant B expressed the victim G, an unspecific number of players, who is the circumstances leading to the original police station E district unit, expressed the victim G with a large amount of “Chewing police sprinks” and continued to insult the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. G statements;

1. A report on investigation (the report on the call of witnesses in cocks);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine);

B. Defendant B: Article 311 of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine)

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant A: In light of the need for strict punishment by assaulting a police officer and committing any contingent crime without severe degree of assault, and the fact that there was no previous violence after 2003, etc.

2. Defendant B: Taking into account the fact that the subject of reflectivity and insult is a police officer, the degree of damage, etc.