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

피고인은 2016. 11. 14. 23:50 경 여수시 하 멜로 2에 있는 여수 경찰서 정문 앞에서 피고인으로부터 폭행을 당한 택시기사 B의 112 신고를 받고 그곳에 출동한 경찰 관인 여수경찰서 C 파출소 소속 경사 D에게 " 씨 발 놈 아 개새끼, 좆도 아닌 놈 아" 라고 말하면서 발로 피해자의 정강이 부위를 1회 찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on handling 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. B written statements;

1. The work log and the list of reported cases;

1. Application of Chapter Two Acts and subordinate statutes to field photographs;

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The punishment of a fine like the order shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) the fact that only two times a fine has been imposed for the same criminal records of the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act; (b) the defendant has committed the instant crime in depth, and partially deposited money for the above damaged public official; and (c) and other conditions of sentencing including the defendant’s age

Rejection of Public Prosecution

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) on November 14, 2016, the Defendant: (b) boarded the victim’s E-cab under the influence of drinking alcohol at around 23:40 on Nov. 14, 2016; (c) however, (d) on the part of the victim, the Defendant she sawd the victim’s E-cab without speaking at the destination; and (d) on the part of the victim, the victim s/he soned the said taxi at his/her own hand in order to report the Defendant to the police.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

2. The part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, and cannot be punished against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

In such a case, the agreement containing an expression of intent that the injured person does not want the punishment of the defendant shall be made on December 14, 2016 after the prosecution of this case.