Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On December 25, 2012, at around 03:45, the Defendant reported 112 at “Dju” located in Guro-gu Seoul, Guro-gu, Seoul, to the police officers F and G belonging to the Guro Police Station E-gu, Guro Police Station E-gu, who called “Ye-gu, Ye-gu, and called “Dju” with the notification of 112 as a drinking-value problem, and there is no reason for it. He fabb, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, the fab, and the fab, and the fab, the Defendant interfere with the legitimate execution of criminal investigation by the police officers by assaulting the right f.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness G, F, and H;

1. A protocol of partial police interrogation of the accused;

1. Statement of the police officer in G (including the F statement part);

1. A statement prepared by H;

1. Each complaint;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on video CDs at the time of arrest;

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

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

1. The defense counsel's assertion regarding the defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that the illegality of a defendant's act constitutes self-defense. However, for a certain act to be recognized as self-defense, it must be reasonable and reasonable to defend the present infringement of his/her own or other person's legal interests. Thus, the defendant's act stated in the facts constituting an offense cannot be deemed as a defense act acceptable by social norms, and it is difficult to view that the defendant committed an assault against the victim based on his/her intent of defense. Thus,