Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

Punishment of the crime

On December 7, 2016, the Defendants drink in the “E singing practice hall” located in the Northern-gu, Northern-gu, at the port of call at around 21:25 on December 7, 2016.

“A person who is requested to present his identification card to verify the control and factual relations of a customs business establishment by G (52 3) and G (40) belonging to the police station in the port north of the Republic of Korea, who is called “A” upon receipt of the report, the Defendant tried to request G to show his identification card only on the ground that the police officer demands him to present his identification card. The Defendant attempted to arrest the Defendant as “I will see that “I will see that I would like to know why I will drink in a singing room, and why I would know why I would know why I d, why I will d, why I d, why I d, why I d, why I d, why I d, why I d, and how you will grow, and that I d', d', how you will fast and d', how you pushed the chest with his hand, and to escape out of the bar bar,” but I would see why I will perform his duties.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of the 112 reported case by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants to the prosecution

1. Application of each statute on police statements made to I, J, G, and H

1. The Defendants of the relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 136(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial concurrent defendants: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants who choose punishment: Fines for negligence

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: The Defendants recognized the crime of this case by which the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act were recognized, and repented, the Defendants did not have any record of being punished for the same crime, and there was no record of punishment.