1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 4,000,000 won;

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, on January 16, 2017, within the main point of "C" located on the 1st underground floor of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Seoul, Seoul, around 23:10 on January 16, 2017, and the Defendant, upon receiving a report from the Defendant, sent to the Defendant upon receipt of the notification that the Defendant would escape from disturbance, such as the attachment of a door door door door door door, was sent to the Defendant, it is immediately harmful to the Defendant, who received a request to state his personal information from E by the police officer

The police officer's legitimate execution of duties concerning the processing of report and investigation was obstructed by assaulting, such as cutting off the E's timber with a bad hand and continuously bating flaps.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

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

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

3. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserted that he was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness by submitting a written opinion stating that he was unable to memory under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. As such, according to the records of this case, even though he was aware that he had drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, or that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things, thereby, the above assertion by the Defendant cannot be accepted.

The reason for sentencing is that the Defendant’s crime of this case is assessed against the police officer in uniform and breath, and thus, it should be punished by strict punishment. However, the Defendant’s mistake and reflects the Defendant’s mistake, the Defendant appears to have committed a crime under the influence of alcohol by contingency, and the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, including the fact that he was punished once by a fine on drinking in 2005, and that he did not have any particular criminal history.