Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On November 26, 2019, at around 21:42, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the police officers belonging to the Kusan Police Station Diplomatic Police Station that was sent out after having received the Defendant’s 112 report that he lost the wall, from operating the patrol vehicle on the ground that the police officers of the said police officers failed to promptly search for the wall; and (b) obstructed the police officers belonging to the same police station called out to prevent the Defendant from operating the patrol vehicle on the ground that he would remove the Defendant from the patrol vehicle; and (c) was sleeped by the police officers belonging to the same police station called up to prevent the Defendant from operating the patrol vehicle on the ground that the police officers would remove the Defendant from the patrol vehicle; and (d) was sleeping the police officers’ dubation of the f, which

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the dispatch and treatment of 112 reported reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. A written statement prepared in the I;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged parts of the F lag, photographs of damaged parts of the E, and CCTV image analysis data;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

1. Selection of a selective fine under Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act;

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

1. The crime of this case on the ground of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is committed against the police officers in uniform after receiving the Defendant’s 112 report. The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is not good, and the crime of obstruction of official duties causes violence or intimidation to the public officials performing their official duties, thereby damaging the State’s function, and thus, requires strict punishment compared to the act of assault or intimidation disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime of this case, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment, as well as the defendant has been punished once due to the crime of this case, and the degree of damage to the victim police officers is not heavy, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

(2).