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

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, from March 3, 2017 to March 23:05, 2017, voluntarily accompanying the victim of other cases at the 1st floor and corridor of the Seoul Heavy Police Station, which is located in 40-10 (in the new dong) a station in Jung-gu, Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, to a person who is a victim of other cases, and was investigated and thereafter “in the Republic of Korea, is a suspect;

B. The victim is the victim.

It was difficult to avoid an investigation as the injured, “(b)” and there was a need to make all necessary statements to C Team Does of the Seoul Southern Police Station C Group D, and the first floor door door door door door door door door door door door door was sent back to the house, and again, the inside door door door door door door door door door door was sent back to the house;

Does it be responsible for correspondence;

In order to avoid the disturbance as a victim and again complete the necessary investigation conducted by the police station D, the police station did not comply with the legitimate request for evacuation from the police station entrance and corridor for about 10 minutes, such as avoiding the disturbance in the police station.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, E, and F;

1. A report on investigation (the reason why the person under consideration has been arrested as the current offender);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Article 319 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 319 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for the crime, and the selection of fines;

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 his/her defense counsel's assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 186 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserted that the defendant and his/her defense counsel's demand for the withdrawal of the victim police officer was not justified, and the defendant asserted that the defendant's forced admission by the police officer was a justifiable act that does not violate social rules.

On the other hand, the following circumstances recognized by this Court comprehensively based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, i.e., police officers who investigated the defendant as a person to be a separate person at the time, are the defendant at the police station office on duty in this Court.