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

1. On March 11, 2018, from around 01:00 to around 01:40 of the same day, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s main store business by force by harming the victim’s main store business by exposing alcohol at “D” points operated by the victim C, which is located in Gangdong-gu Seoul, without any justifiable reason, by shicking alcohol bottles on the table, booming the booms, and booming the booms of the above restaurant without any justifiable reason, while taking a bath for other customers, and making other customers feel a disturbance, such as booming the booms while taking a bath, thereby obstructing the victim’s main store business.

2. When the Defendant: (a) was arrested of a flagrant offender on the grounds of the facts constituting the crime described in paragraph 1 from F (3) of the police box affiliated with the Gangnam-gu Seoul East Police Station E commander of the Seoul Police Station, which was called out after receiving 112 reports from the time, place, as described in paragraph 1, at the time and place described in paragraph 1; (b) the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties; and (c) was arrested from the F (42) of the police box affiliated with the police box called out of the Republic of Korea, the Defendant

“In doing so, at the same head, assaults the face of the F at one time, and interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the reported case by the police officer on the back of the patrol vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and C;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs and field photographs of damaged police officers;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 316(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties), and the selection of fines for the crime;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with regard to the order of provisional payment is sufficient to constitute the crime of this case

Although it is not possible to see that the defendant reflects his mistake in depth, that the victim of the crime interfering with the business of this case does not want the punishment of the defendant, and that if the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment due to the crime of this case, the defendant will lose his workplace.