Defendants shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fines, only 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 26, 2017, the Defendant: (a) while drinking alcohol in the “F of the operation of the Victim E” room in Seopopo City D on February 26, 2017, Defendant A, without any justifiable reason, was able to give the victim a bath to “fristly drinking f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f.

The victim interfered with the victim's soft business by force of about 10 minutes, such as breathing the victim's breath with the victim's fat with the defect's fat.

2. Defendant B: (a) at the same place as at February 26, 2017, at around 21:30, at the same time as Paragraph (1) of Paragraph (1) of the same Article, the Defendant: (b) the police officer of the Seocho-gu Police Station Hapo Police Station, who was called out after having received a report that Defendant G was frighting the Defendant, and the police officer of the police box belonging to the Seocho-gu Police Station Hapo Police Station, and the assistant J would arrest and accompany the said G as a flagrant offender and attempted to arrest the said G as a flagrant offender; (c)

"........... the table was placed at the entrance of the above sub-speak, was fluored by cutting the table and blocking the street, and was assaulted by the chief of the sub-speak and the first-speaker's work force.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the investigation of 112 reported police officers and legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each statement of E and I;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act; Selection of a fine;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with regard to the order of provisional payment is that Defendant A was sentenced to a crime of obstructing the performance of official duties and the execution of the sentence is terminated, and Defendant B was sentenced to imprisonment for six months for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (refluence of alcohol measurement) in 2016 and for two years for a suspended sentence, and is still under the suspended sentence and is also subject to multiple criminal punishments in addition to the above criminal records.