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

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

Punishment of the crime

On November 25, 2015, the Defendant: (a) on the front side of the “C convenience store” located in the Seoul Jung-gu Seoul Central District Court B; (b) on the front side of the “C convenience store; (c) on the patrol of the police officer E working for the Seoul Central District Police Station D District E, the Defendant confirmed the circumstances suspected of having driven alcohol; (d) requested the Defendant to conduct a drinking test; and (e) on the other police officers who received a request for support from E, the Defendant’s other police officers who suffered a request for the support of E’

E, stating that it would be different to F, who is the police officer of the Eastern Police, “F,” and “F,”

“The automobile keys cited by the Defendant while taking the bath as “,” and assaulted E’s chest part by blicking two times.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on crime prevention patrol and drinking control.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of the statute of indictment in relation to the case

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The reasons why the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was adjusted by E, the dispute between the defendant and his substitute driver, and the defendant, who stated that the defendant would not drive a motor vehicle without drinking, would return home again at the site of the motor vehicle, and the defendant will also return home as well.

Despite the fact that there was a reason to see the crime of this case, it is unreasonable to regulate drinking, and the fact that the crime of this case was committed is disadvantageous.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant has no criminal history for the same kind of crime and reflects his or her mistake is favorable.

In the above circumstances, the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc., shall be determined as per the order.