Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for six months.

However, this judgment is delivered to Defendant A.

Punishment of the crime

1. A violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint destruction, damage, etc.) and interference with duties on February 19, 2014, Defendants: (a) cut off the E-cab driven by the victim D under the influence of alcohol prior to the Mapo-gu Seoul Maporo, Mapo-gu, Seoul; and (b) plucked up and plucked on the bucker on both sides by hand; and (c) Defendant A laid down the back part of the right side of the said taxi.

Defendant B continued to stand side, and Defendant A set off G-si operated by the victim F, who was driving by the victim F, who was going on the side, and she sited on the front of the said taxi and opened the front part of the said taxi to the right side by hand.

As a result, the Defendants jointly damaged the victim D's taxi to move out of the repair cost, and interfered with the victims' taxi operation by force for about 30 minutes.

2. Defendant B, upon receiving 112 report that the property was damaged at the time, place, as described in paragraph (1) and having been dispatched at the above time, insultingly insulting the victim, Defendant B, the victim of the case, was sexually insultingly insultingd by the victim, who was the police officer affiliated with the Seoul Mapo Police Station H District of the Seoul Mapo Police Station, who was the victim, “I see the case, she shall be shotly frightd, she frightd, and she shall be frighted.”

3. Defendant A, at the time, and at the place specified in Paragraph 2, attempted to see the instant case by the police officer I, to see the same, Defendant A attempted to shotly grow “Chewing fright. Chewing fright.”

Accordingly, I arrested the defendant as property damage, etc. and boarded the defendant on the back seat of the patrol vehicle and moved to the H district while moving to the H district, and the defendant "Chewing sprinks and driving are immediately known," and the face of J was taken one time at the seat of the police station where he was seated with a mobile phone.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted I and J and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers with regard to the handling of 112 reports and arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1..