Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000 (three million).

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

Punishment of the crime

(Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties) Around 23:50 on December 9, 2014, the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol in front of the C convenience point located in Hadonam-gun B, and, upon receiving a report, she was compelled to return home from E, the circumstances leading up to the D District of the Ydo Police Station D, E, and the breath who was urged to return home from F, and her blag, and boomed the e’s bat.

As a result, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes E by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of suspect of the police accused;

1. Each statement of the police about E, F, and G;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the criminal complaint, a written statement, or video data, the criminal scene of which is recorded (Evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 9);

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines;

1. The portion not guilty of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act in the custody of a workhouse (Contempt);

1. Around December 23:50, 2014, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant, on the front of the C convenience point located in Hadonam-gun B, was under the influence of alcohol; (b) was urged by the Defendant to return home from E in the circumstances belonging to the D District belonging to the Hado Police Station D District, and from the victim guard F (the age of 42) who was called out upon receipt of the report; (c) the Defendant, employees of the above convenience store, and criminal players, without any reason, provided that the Defendant expressed the victim’s desire to “Ieato Ga, su, Ie, Ie, I am at the Hadon House.”

Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim.

2. The term "defluence" as referred to in the crime of insult of a trademark means expressing an abstract judgment or a satisfic appraisal that may undermine people's social evaluation without indicating any fact;

In addition, in the event of a mixture of insulting expressions during the statement, the motive, background, background, overall purport of the statement, specific method of expression, the proportion of insulting expressions in the entire statement as well as overall relation with the contents of the statement.