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

On September 13, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc.) at the Daejeon District Court on September 13, 2012, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 23, 2012.

On June 25, 2012, from around 03:22 to 05:25, the Defendant continued to open the door of B vehicle and close the alarm system in order to shoulder female living together in the state of drinking drinking in the Blue-Ba 310-17, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu.

The Defendant reported 112 and sent to the above location by the victim D, who is a police officer of the C District District, was aware of the gap caused by the Defendant’s car in order to prevent noise, and publicly insultd the victim by openly insulting the victim by saying, “I am, there are three police officers in front of the past, and there were three people, such as E, F, G, H, and H, which are neighboring residents,” while there are three police officers in front of the past. On the ground that there is no police officer, there was no police officer, the Defendant set up the rank softened and cut off. The Defendant d's son, a police officer of the C District District, who is a police officer of the Defendant, who was sent to the above location. D's flag, chewing, and bit of bitch bit.’

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Each statement of E, F, G, and H;

1. Complaints, on-site photographs;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Daejeon District Court Decision 2012Ma2425 Decided September 13, 2012; the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the Agreement Assistants in the case agreement;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 311 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that even if the defendant had the same criminal record, it is inevitable to strictly punish the crime of this case.

However, the crime of this case is the concurrent crime of the previous conviction and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

In this context, considering all the circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment is determined as ordered.