Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 22, 2015, at around 02:35, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the victim’s restaurant operation by force; (b) obstructed the victim’s restaurant operation by force, such as: (c) the victim C’s D restaurant operated in Jeju-si; (d) the sound was filled with, without any justifiable reason, the locking of the table; (d) the gas burner on which the table table was on the table; and (e) the string of the table; and (e) having the customers on the side throw away from the table; and (e) having them throw away

2. The Defendant who interfered with the performance of official duties is clearly stated in the facts charged in the facts charged in F of the situation belonging to the Seo-gu Police Station E District Police Station, which was dispatched to the site after receiving a report on the same reason as Paragraph 1, at the same time and place as Paragraph 1, but is obvious that it is a clerical error of “F”, and thus, ex officio

§ 454,00,000

"In doing so, the police officers assaulted the police officers in such a way as to fall off the uniforms worn by the police officers and cut down by the KON, and interfered with the legitimate performance of public duties concerning the maintenance of order of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes to each relevant photograph;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 316(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties), and the selection of fines for the crime;

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

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act as to the order of provisional payment interferes with duties by preventing disturbance at another person’s place of business on the ground of sentencing, and the nature of each of the crimes in this case’s case’s use of tangible power to the police officers dispatched after receiving a report.

However, the defendant is the first offender who has no criminal history, all of the facts constituting the crime, and reflects his depth on the wrong facts, and the defendant's mental illness is partly affected by the defendant's act resulting in the crime of this case.