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

1. On November 8, 2017, the Defendant, at the beginning of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, tried to drive a motor vehicle again after regulating the driving of a motor vehicle by drinking on the front of the motor vehicle, and tried to drive the motor vehicle again, and at the same time, the Defendant, who was in charge of the performance of official duties, told C of the traffic safety division B team of the Air Force Police Station, “drawing an acting engineer,” along with the horses, was at the time when the Defendant was forced to stop with the horses, saying, “I am the house, and will do so with the mind of the police officer.”

이에 위 경찰관이 피고인을 공무집행 방해죄의 현행 범인으로 체포를 하면서 피고인을 넘어뜨리자 피고인은 누운 상태에서 위 경찰관의 허벅지 부위를 수회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the crackdown on drinking driving.

2. The Defendant, at the time, and at the place specified in paragraph 1, shall: “I am in mind, I am in that I am under the control of I am sar.”; and “I am in that I am sar sar. I am. I am to drive by proxy if I am sar. I am.

I would like to win one food with drinking.

The victim was openly insultingd by 7 or 8 neighboring residents by referring to the large interest of “the victim”.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Written complaint;

1. Application of the main driving report, investigation report (referring to the statement of reference and the submission of screen pictures), on-site video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties), Article 311 of the Criminal Act (the point of insulting) and the selection of each fine for a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the characteristics of the instant crime and the degree of the type and force of the Defendant’s exercise, the fact that the Defendant appears to be contrary to the recognition of the instant crime, and other matters.