Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, for each of six months, for each of six months.

except that from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A’s property damage around May 6, 2016, around 00:30, at 6 times the G sing plaza of the victim F’s operation of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E2 level, Defendant A had a verbal dispute with B and C while drinking together, Defendant A’s property damage caused damage to Defendant A’s property damage by gathering one of the radio microphones equivalent to KRW 2,30,000 at the market price of the victim’s possession in the singing room.

2. Around 00:50 on May 6, 2016, the Defendants’ joint criminal act at the G singing room as indicated in paragraph (1) above, Defendant A filed 112 reports with the F of singing-in-sing-in-sing-in-sing-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in-s-in

H and I recommended Defendant A to agree with F in a smooth manner, and Defendant A is not an internal one but a part of the other.

“The inside of the Republic of Korea was interfered with when the inside of the Republic of Korea was at any time,” even though the State gives a warning that H may interfere with the performance of official duties, and that H may interfere with the performance of official duties.

The phrase “I’s table is sealed several times by hand, and H and I’s attempt to arrest Defendant A as the current criminal of interference with the performance of official duties by Defendant A, and Defendant B and Defendant C were arrested in mind by us.

As set forth in paragraph “”, Defendant B sealed the body of H with his hand and shoulder, Defendant C assaulted H’s arms by cutting off and cutting off his arms, and H and I.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to interfere with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

(The Defendants and defense counsel are passive resistances made by Defendant A to prevent it from being illegally arrested, and do not constitute a crime of obstructing the execution of official duties.

However, according to each of the following evidence, the arrest of the defendant A cannot be deemed illegal, and the exercise of force against the police officers cannot be deemed as an act that does not violate social norms. Thus, the defendants and defense counsel should be viewed as an act that does not violate social norms.