Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 8,000,00, and by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

On January 1, 2018, at around 02:27, the Defendants: (a) 02:27, and (b) 112 on the front road of Suwon-gu, and (c) Had the Defendant A arrested a flagrant offender on the charge of assault from a slope G belonging to the police station in Suwon-gu, the Suwon-gu, the Suwon-gu, the 112 reported and called, and (b) Had the Defendant B 2 times after putting the said H’s arms. Defendant C puts his arms into the said G, followed the said G’s arms at one time; and (b) Defendant A tried to divide his head into two parts of the body and the head of the other part of the body after breaking the said H.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement made in relation to I, H and G;

1. Side photographs of the assault;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

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 each Criminal Act (Punishments imposed on a person who has heavier penalty than that of a crime)

1. Defendants who choose punishment: Each selective fine

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, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, committed damage to the public authority with regard to the enforcement of the Act by exercising force collectively against police officers in uniform who have been in order to prevent their assault by taking advantage of the fact that the number is more than that of pressure police officers.

Defendant

A not only commenced violence against taxi engineers who became the end of the instant case, but also the degree of violence exercised to police officers is most serious.

Defendant

A had been sentenced to three times of a fine for violence-related crimes before the instant case, but again committed the instant crime. However, the Defendants did not have any criminal record exceeding a fine.

Defendants committed the instant crime by contingently, and committed the crime.