Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,00 and by a fine of KRW 2,00,000, respectively.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A

A. On January 3, 2018, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the victim’s legitimate restaurant operation by force by leaving the “E” restaurant operated by the victim D, which is located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoul, on the ground that the victim said that “the victim would interfere with his/her business,” and said, he/she said that “the victim would interfere with his/her business” at the restaurant; and (b) obstructed the victim’s legitimate restaurant operation by force.

B. The Defendant damaged the property by destroying the door frame owned by the victim, which was located at the same time, at the time, at the place, as described in the above paragraph 1-A, and at the same time, at the place, during the disturbance as described in the above paragraph 1-A, so that 1.50,00 won

(c)

The Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties at the time and place specified in the foregoing paragraph 1-A, and the background leading up to the F District of the Seoul Western Police Station, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seoul, upon receiving a report from 112, prevented the Defendant from disturbing the disturbance as stated in the foregoing paragraph 1-A, and assaulted the said G to walk on the bridge part of G while taking a bath to ask his personal information.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning reporting duties and criminal investigations by police officers in uniform.

2. Defendant B, at the time and place described in the above paragraph 1-A, was assaulted by G in the circumstances belonging to the Daejeon Western Police Station F District Police Station G, as set out in paragraph 1-C of the above paragraph, and Defendant B, etc., to arrest the above Party A as a flagrant offender due to interference with the performance of official duties, etc., Defendant B committed assault with Defendant B’s damage, etc., and knicked the above H in his hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of a flagrant offender by a police officer in uniform.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Application of the respective laws and regulations of D and G;

1. Defendant A of the pertinent Article of the Criminal Act: Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act, and fines.