Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On October 17, 2010, at around 09:30 on October 17, 2010, the Defendant publicly insultingd the victim E, a police officer belonging to the Seo-gu Seo-gu Police Station D Boxes, who was called up after receiving a report at the location of 50 through 60 persons, including C, a market merchant, at the site of the removal of the electric poles located in Yangdong-dong, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju. The Defendant expressed to the victim E, who was a police officer belonging to the Seo-gu Police Station D Boxes, who was called up after receiving a report. The spath must spatht. The spatht spa

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. Witness G from among the fifth public trial records, witness H from among the public trial records, witness I from among the 7th public trial records, C and J from among the 9th public trial records, each statement from witness I and J from among the 9th public trial records;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing witness C's partial statement in the sixth protocol of trial;

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the summary of interference with the business among the charges of this case under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s removal work by: (a) around 09:00 on October 17, 2010, the victim F, etc., who is L workers in the Seo-gu Seoul K market, entered the construction site for the purpose of removing telegraphs; and (b) making the victim f, etc. take a bath before the drilling for about one hour on the ground that noise was paid, thereby preventing the Defendant from carrying out the removal work.

On the other hand, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant construction is an illegal construction solely carried out for the convenience of the merchants of the K market without setting up measures to reduce noise, and that it does not interfere with the duty to protect under the Criminal Act or constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

In this case, the witness F, I's statement in the protocol of the trial of this case and the Korea Electric Power Corporation.