Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Criminal facts

On December 17, 2016, the Defendant: (a) at a hospital located in Kimhae-si B around 22:40 on December 17, 2016, the Defendant visited the emergency room at the right shoulder; (b) received medical treatment; and (c) requested the Defendant to enter the arms to be taken by the victim D by a radiation-related medical technician in shooting X-ra in the film department, and (d) demanded the Defendant to get the arms to be taken by the victim D.

They must be patients. They have been after N.I.D.

Ir. B. B. B. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. B. B. B. B. B. B. H. and B. B. E. B. for emergency rescue workers without photographing X-S.

Mad Doz.

Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz.

It was difficult to avoid disturbance for about 30 minutes, including “Abrupter E and a doctor on duty,” “Abrupter E and a doctor on duty,” intending to take the police, and throw the police on the floor, and put the promotional materials of hospital guidance on the floor.”

As a result, the Defendant interfered with emergency rescue transfer emergency treatment or diagnosis and treatment of emergency patients by force of emergency medical service workers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. A D Inspector;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing emergency department records;

1. Article 60 (1) 1 and Article 12 of the Emergency Medical Service Act concerning facts constituting an offense and the choice of punishment;

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which are favorable to the defendant, include the fact that the defendant has a deep depth of his mistake and reflects his mistake, and that the defendant has no other criminal records except that he has been punished twice by a fine, are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, in light of the content and method of the crime of this case, the nature and the circumstances of the crime are not good, and the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victims up to now is disadvantageous to the defendant.