Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On March 2, 2018, the Defendant is not a counter-espionage who received a 112 report from the entrance of the 108 Gags apartment complex at the 108 Gags, Jin-si, Jin-si, Jin-si, Seoul, and received a request to inform the Defendant of personal information from the slope C and D belonging to the police box B of the party called on the site, and who received a request to inform him of such personal information.

Doctrine of police officers

"................... with the floor of hand the head of the above slope C at one time and continued to restrain it, the above patrolman at D’s left side knife of the slope C at one time.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to the prevention, suppression and investigation of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or C;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. Although the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds of sentencing of the instant crime is not good in light of the motive of the instant crime, the punishment is determined as ordered by comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized the crime and reflects the mistake; (b) the first offender; (c) the degree of violence exercised by the police officer was not relatively heavy; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sex and conduct; (d) motive and circumstance of the crime; (e) the means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime.