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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

[2016 Highest 8787] The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on December 1, 2016, at around 07:00, the art of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Seoul, 230 Cheongjin-do.

Accordingly, the police officer D, who was dispatched to the site after receiving a report that "a male is being used on the road", was scambling the defendant by scambling the defendant and scambling him, and the defendant once marizing on the road.

Accordingly, the police officers such as the above D brought the defendant into India, and the defendant assaulted the defendant to walk the right face of the above D once.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the maintenance of public order.

[2017 Highest 553] On January 6, 2017, the Defendant damaged the property by getting the victim H, who was the customer of the said main point, out of the dispute, on the grounds that G, the business owner of the said main point, wanted to go to himself/herself within the “F main point located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Incheon.”

Summary of Evidence

[2016 Highest 8787]

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. On-site photographs and damaged photographs (2017est 553);

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A H statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to opticians;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for a 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. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not focus on damage caused by the damage of reasons for sentencing of the provisional payment order, but rather on the smooth agreement with the victim, the degree of tangible power exercised to the police in relation to the obstruction of the performance of official duties is not much serious, and all of the crimes of this case committed by this case shall be deemed to have been committed contingent.