Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2014. 11. 27. 23:20경 청주시 서원구 C에서, 피고인이 승차하였던 D 택시기사인 E에게 욕을 하며 시비를 걸던 중, E의 112신고를 접수하여 현장에 출동한 청주상당경찰서 F지구대 소속 경위 G과 경장 H로부터 ‘택시비를 지불한 뒤 귀가하라’는 말을 듣자, 경위 G과 경장 H에게 “너는 뭐야, 이 새끼들아, 니들의 짭새냐, 이런 씹새끼들, 개새끼들”이라고 욕설을 하고, 청주시 서원구 I에 있는 청주상당경찰서 F지구대에서 발로 경위 G과 경장 H의 정강이를 걷어차고, 경위 G의 멱살을 잡고 흔들었다.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with police officers' performance of duties concerning prevention, suppression, investigation, and maintenance of order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and G;

1. A statement prepared by H;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (suspect's failure)

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3505, Jun. 25, 2009)

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, along with the expression of the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Provisional Payment Order, appears to have been satisfed by police officers who suffered satisfying, making a difference in satisfy, and having been satisfying. According to the result of criminal punishment, the police officers who were subject to dismissal or heavy disciplinary action are not only in a long period of service, but also in a workplace where they may be subjected to dismissal or heavy disciplinary action, and they must be carefully cautioned about the crime committed under the influence of alcohol, such as the fact that they committed the crime of this case. Thus, in light of the attitude and reflective nature presented by the Defendant in the court, they are judged to be remarkably satfying, and immediately after they