Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

Around 01:30 on August 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) expressed that he drink with E, etc. and she wraped with G, a main agent of the said main shop in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) received a report from 112 and obstructed the Defendant’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of reports and criminal acts by committing assault by the police officer, who is a police officer belonging to the H district of the Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station H district, called “I would like to have to make payment. I would like to do so, I will do so?” and the Defendant expressed his desire to “I will do so. I will do so? I will do so? I will do so? I will do so? I will do so.” The Defendant saw I’s chest and arms with both hands, she boomed two times with the said I’s arms, and interfered with the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of reports and criminal acts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement fit to the defendant's statements;

1. Each statement made by a witness I in the third protocol of trial, by the J and F in the fourth protocol of trial;

1. Statement of the police statement to I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to on-site reports;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines;

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the order of provisional payment are as follows: (a) the Defendant was suspected of having committed a joint injury to G at the scene of the crime; (b) committed an assault against the police officer while resisting him/her; and (c) committed an offense of obstruction of performance of official duties in the process of obstructing the arrest of other accomplices; (d) the legality of performing his/her duties, such as handling reported duties by the police officer and arresting flagrant offenders, under the premise of the establishment of the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, should be objectively determined based on the specific circumstances at the time; and (e) whether the arrested person was recognized as an offender after the fact (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do4763, Aug. 23, 2013). Even if the Defendant was found not guilty