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

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 16, 2016, at around 05:00, the Defendant destroyed the damage of property by cutting off one cell phone of Samsung Emp III, which was the victim’s wife, from the “D amusement shop” operated by the victim C, which was located in Chuncheon City, to the drinking value, and thereby damaging the content of the screen that was laid down on the floor by cutting off one cell phone of Samsung Emp III, which was the victim’s wife, and was the victim’s wife.

2. On September 16, 2016, at the place indicated in paragraph (1) around 05:25 on September 16, 2016, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties: “A guest fright to fright to fright to fright to fright;” “A guest fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright;

"At the same time as F's her hand can be applied to her, and assault F with his/her hand, such as her booming F by force.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning field measures by police officers according to 112 report.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 366 of the Criminal Act that selects a punishment, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of failing to perform official duties), and Article 136 (2) of the Criminal Act (a point of failing to perform official duties), and the

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that it is not good that the Defendant committed an assault and assault against police officers F in the course of performing official duties.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant did not want criminal punishment against the defendant under the agreement with the victim C, and that the defendant did not have the same criminal record is an element of sentencing favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime are shown in the argument of this case.