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

At around 10:30 on March 29, 2020, the Defendant: (a) committed assault on the roads in front of sub-city B building; (b) on the ground that he was under influence on the roads in front of sub-city B building; and (c) he was asked about personal information from the fluor D belonging to the vice fluor D of the Busan High Police Station C District District, 112 called “A person who was under influence of alcohol; and (d) he was fluored by the fluor E who was dispatched on the spot by putting the fluor, “I fluor, fluor, and fluored, the fluor, the fluor, the fluor, and the fluor’s fluor, the fluor’s fluor, and the fluor’s fluor’s fluor.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (such as the absence of personal information of a suspected suspect, etc.) on the police police officer’s written statement No. 3 of the suspect interrogation protocol E to the accused in the court statement of the accused, each investigation report (the victim’s agreement intent and police officer’s scope of duties, confirmation of suspect’s whereabouts)

1. The pertinent Article on criminal facts, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act on the choice of punishment (the point of obstruction of performance of official duties), and the crime of this case on the selection of fine, are deemed to have been committed by the Defendant, who was drunk, by breathing the police officer upon receiving a report, and committing an assault by breathing him, and the nature of the crime is not good in terms of the background

Although the Defendant was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended sentence due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act in 2013, he again committed the crime of this case similar thereto, and thus, the risk of recidivism is also likely.

However, all of the instant crimes were led to confessions and reflects by the Defendant, and the Defendant did not have been punished for the same crime as the instant crime after 2013, and the Defendant was able to give a serious bath to police officers at the time of the instant crime, but the exercise of force is merely a shoulder.