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

On October 16, 2017, at around 03:55, the Defendant drinking alcohol at the main point of operation D in Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, as a problem of the foregoing D and alcohol value, and the Defendant stated to the effect that “On the part of the Defendant, the background F of the region belonging to the Mine Police Station E District, dispatched upon 112, left the place without paying the alcohol value.” The Defendant stated to the effect that “On the other hand, the Defendant calculated the drinking value, and, on the other hand, filed a civil petition with the Mine Office at the next time, the police officers raised a civil petition to the Mine Office.”

As it is impossible to calculate the drinking value, “A police station .....” assaulted the above police officer’s title on the part of the above police officer by making the above police officer go on one occasion with his left hand, making him go on the part of the above police officer.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reporting duties and the maintenance of order by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s defense counsel’s assertion of the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, the defense counsel was in a mental and physical state under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime

The argument is asserted.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, even though the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, in light of all the circumstances, such as the background and content leading to the instant crime, the defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the degree of the defendant’s memory at the time of committing the crime, the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime, and was in

As such, the above assertion is rejected.

The reason for sentencing is the confession.