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

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 5, 2014, at around 22:15, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the damage of property by putting the victim’s singing microphones on the floor, which are the victim’s ownership, in one set of the Dnoby club operated by the victim C (ma 36 years of age) who was in father-si and Seocheon-si B.

2. On May 5, 2014, at around 23:50, the Defendant 23:50 of the obstruction of performance of official duties: (a) arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender; (b) assaulted the Defendant on one time at the left face of the said G at the patrol vehicle; (c) sponsed the Defendant into the front side of the said G on one occasion; and (d) spacked the Defendant into the earth floor in the F District located in Hacheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si; and (c) spacked the Defendant on the ground of his desire to read “I spacks, I spacks, and I spacks what times?” and interfere with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers regarding criminal investigations.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning C and G;

1. Application of each photograph, each of the Acts and subordinate statutes reporting on investigation;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment stipulated for the crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties heavier than punishment);

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014).

1. The act of exercising violence against a police officer who is performing legitimate official duties for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not correspond to a crime committed by the public authority. However, it is not good that the defendant made a confession of the crime of this case and divided his mistake in depth, the defendant made an agreement with the victim of the damage to property, the primary crime without criminal power, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc.