Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 26, 2020, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s main business by force of approximately 30 minutes and obstructing the victim’s main business by avoiding disturbance, i.e., taking alcohol into account the main points operated by the victim C, who sited in other tables, without any reason, and taking advantage of the influence of alcohol.

2. Around October 27, 2020, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties at the above location, and assaulted the face of the above E three times at the hand of the Defendant, who received a report of 112, such as “the customer scam and scambling,” and received a request for returning home from the slope E belonging to the police station of the Yeongdeungpo-dong Police Station of Yeongdeungpo-dong Police Station, which called for “the customer scam and scaming.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement of C and F;

1. Image photographs of CCTV that obstructs business affairs;

1. Application of statutes to photographs that obstruct the performance of public duties;

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 fact that there is no recovery of damage to a crime interfering with the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the fact that a crime interfering with the performance of official duties harms the function of the State by assaulting or threatening a public official who properly performs his/her duties, and thus, requires strict punishment compared to the ordinary act of assault or intimidation is disadvantageous to the defendant, or that the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime of this case, and that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment except for the case where he/she has been punished once by a fine due to the crime of drinking, and the defendant's age, sexual behavior, attitude, and background and motive leading to the crime.