Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] The Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for obstruction of performance of official duties at the Ulsan District Court on September 2, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 17, 201, and is currently under probation.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On June 21, 2013, from around 04:00 to around 05:00 of the same day, the Defendant: (a) took a bath to the owner of the business on the ground that he did not drink in the E-cafeteria operated by the victim D in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu; (b) took a bath to the neighboring customer; and (c) took a bath to the surrounding customer; and (d) acted as he does to other customers, thereby obstructing the victim’s restaurant business by force.

2. The obstruction of performance of official duties, the Defendant, at the time and place of paragraph (1) of this Article, committed an act of interference with performance of official duties, on the ground that the police officer G (the age of 26) belonging to the Ulsan-nam Police Station F District Police Station G (the age of 26) who was called out after receiving a report on 112 due to the foregoing interference with duties, prevented the Defendant from exercising assault against the said G on the ground that he was the Defendant.

In this regard, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases, and at the same time inflicted an injury on the G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Photographs (five copies), such as prosecution of police officers, acts of victims, etc.;

1. A written request for cooperation with investigation;

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records;

1. Articles 314 (1), 136 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Although it is reasonable to impose severe punishment on each of the crimes of this case during the period during which the punishment of Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act was suspended, the degree of damage to the victims is limited.