Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. On December 3, 2017, around 17:10 on December 3, 2017, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the Defendant’s business operation by force by force, such as: (b) prior to the E shop operated by the victim D in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, by taking a bath with a large amount of drinking alcohol; (c) preventing the Plaintiff from entering the said shop by exposing the flag, such as a caring the flag and a caring the flag.

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the time, place, and 112 reported and sent out to the Defendant, who was subject to the Defendant’s check from the slope G, the police officer of the Seoul Western Police Station, who was called out after receiving the 112 report, brought the Defendant to drinking alcohol.

C. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz.

In contrast, it is very difficult to say that it is against the law.

B. The end of half theme must not be the end of half theme.

p. A public official shall not speak half.

"I" and "I", the chest part of the above G was pushed back once, and the police officer's legitimate performance of official duties was hindered in a way that the head part of the above G was cut back by a lush hand on one occasion.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties) and the selection of each fine for a crime;

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, which prevents another person’s business, who was under the influence of alcohol, and thereby prevents a police officer from performing his legitimate official duties by exercising an assault against a police officer called out after receiving a report by him, and the liability for the crime is not exceptionally imposed.

However, the defendant's attempt to commit the crime of this case and is against the victim of interference with the business of this case, and the victim wanted to find the defendant's wife against the defendant, the police officer who used the defendant's assaulted to find his wife, and the interference with the business.