Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

At around 03:00 on June 23, 2013, the Defendant continued to receive a request for withdrawal from 112 reported at the office of the Incheon Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu Estation, but the Defendant obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the protection of the reported victim by committing assaulting the aforesaid F, such as avoiding and refusing to obey the request by the EstationF belonging to the Incheon Gyeyang-gu Police Station Estation, which was called after receiving a report of 112, and neglecting and refusing the said F’s own arms, making the francing of the said F by hand, francing the franc, and francing the parts adjacent to the police clothes, and francing it into the wall to the degree of tear.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines;

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

1. The portion not guilty of Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the point of refusal to leave) of the provisional payment order;

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the defendant, at around 01:30 on June 23, 2013, under the influence of alcohol at the office of the victim D located in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu, the defendant takes a bath for the victim and threatened the victim and asked the victim to leave the scene. However, the defendant does not comply with the request and does not leave the victim's place within the house until the police officer dispatched by the report of the victim at around 03:00 on the same day arrives, and without good cause until the police officer arrives.

It is the fact that the Gu has not complied with.

2. In light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of this case, the relationship between the Defendant and D, and the background leading up to the 112 report, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was required to leave the Defendant.

or to leave the defendant; or

It is difficult to readily conclude that there was intention to refuse to comply with the Gu.

Therefore, since the facts charged against the defendant's refusal to leave constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act