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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 26, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 17:45 on October 26, 2015, the victim victim D, the head of the marina warehouse, was unable to engage in the marina business by 20 minutes, on the ground that he lost a baby vehicle set up in front of the marina entrance prior to the marina entrance; and (b) on the ground that he lost a baby vehicle set up in front of the marina entrance prior to the marina office, the victim D, the head of the marina warehouse, was able to get off the string of the office, and shut down the office door with

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the business of the injured party by force.

2. The Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties at the same time and place of the same, and when a F, who was called out after receiving a report of 112 that he interfered with the business of the Defendant, taken the Defendant’s interference with the business of the E District of the Seoul Guro Police Station, the Defendant committed assault, such as cutting the cell phone from the cell phone, cutting the F’s cell phone on the floor, cutting off the F’s police gate, cutting down the F, cutting down the F’s police gate on the right side, cutting off the F’s head on his hand, and cutting the F’s head on his hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on 112 reporting processing affairs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to D, G, and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on dispatch to the scene, photographs of damage, and documentary images and photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

(a) point of interference with business: Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act;

(b) The point of obstructing the performance of official duties: Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment (the following circumstances shall be considered):

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. Furthermore, in the act of interference with business for the reasons of sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, the crime liability is not exceptionally imposed on police officers, such as the fact that an agreement with the victims or failure to recover from damage up to the present day, but it is a contingency crime under the influence of alcohol, the confession and depth of the crime in this court is against the victim, and the victim police officers are found.