Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 10, 2020, the Defendant received a 112 report on the 112nd roads of Hanwon, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, on April 10, 2020, stating that “the Defendant became a taxi engineer or a Si guard,” and received a notification of a non-leviated penalty under the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, and received the notification from E and the Senior F.

Therefore, the Defendant: (a) resisted E and F of the 112 patrols in order to board the 112 patrols after the instant case; (b) obstructed the traffic of the patrols from opening the door by putting the driver’s seat door; (c) obstructed the front of the patrols; and (d) obstructed the passage of the patrols for about 20 minutes by continuously blocking E from shutting the front door of the patrols from the patrols.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reported cases by E and F, a police official.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. 112 Report sheet, work log in the D District;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photograph CCTV images by capturing them;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime concerned;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act dealing with ordinary concurrences;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation and lecture attendance order Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the reason of sentencing is a police officer who gets home under the influence of alcohol and exercises a stimulative power, and thus, cannot be deemed to be less and less criminal liability. However, in light of the fact that the degree of the exercise of stimulative power is very minor, that the drinking is very minor, that a person with a shoulderer's own stimulative behavior is engaged in gathering depth by very rough and stimulcing, and that the situation where the injured police officer was found to have committed a serious death, and that the risk of recidivism is not likely to occur when comprehensively considering the fact that the injured police officer was stimulatedd while working in a stable workplace.