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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

At around 22:55 on May 2, 2017, the Defendant reported 112 to the effect that he was unable to use his keyss on the roads of Cheongju-gu, Seowon-gu, Seowon-si, and was requested by F to take a drinking test from the victim F, who was dispatched to the site after reporting 112 under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant got a request for a drinking test from the police officer belonging to the Cheongju-gu, the Cheongju Police Station Ear-gu, who was dispatched to the site. As the Defendant had a large number of players, the Defendant “Wookis. Between two rings, she had a warrant.

Chewing fluort fluort fluorch.

In a large sound, “the victim was openly insulting.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to arrest and report the occurrence of a case and copy of investigation report;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 311 of the choice of punishment;

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 concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion on the argument of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that the illegality of the instant crime should be avoided as a legitimate defense, since the Defendant’s act of denying the driving of drinking and refusing to take a drinking test, and thus, took a bath in the process of protesting against illegal arrest that lacks the requirements for arrest of flagrant offenders.

According to the above evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, it can be acknowledged that the victim who committed the crime of this case was arrested as a flagrant offender through lawful procedures, such as taking a bath against the victim who is a police official who intends to measure drinking, etc., and the defendant's act does not constitute legitimate defense. Thus, the above argument is rejected.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.