Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 22:00 on July 17, 2017, the Defendant driven a Dben E30-car under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.192% at the 1.8km-ro, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, Yongsan-gu, from the front side of a Myanmar hotel located in the 60-ro, Jung-gu, Seoul, Seoul, to the 247-ro, Yongsan-gu, Seoul.

2. On July 17, 2017, around 22:19, the Defendant who obstructed the performance of official duties was found to have caused a traffic accident on the front road of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, and was reported to the 112 Report and sought confirmation as to whether G of the Seoul Yongsan Police Station F Station, who was called out, was the Defendant’s drinking condition, and whether “on the back of the police, the Defendant is so doing.”

“A person who was cited in a lush hand, committed violence, such as 3 times the chest part of G’s chest, with the lush hand.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning 112 reporting handling duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to G and H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a statement on the circumstances of a driver placed in the main place and a report on detection of such driver;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Articles 136(1)2 and 44(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for criminal facts, Articles 148-2(2)2 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of drinking alcohol), and each fine (the point of not re-offending by the defendant, reflecting the depth of the crime in this case; the defendant appears to have committed a crime interfering with the performance of official duties in the state of loss of his ability to judge and self-regulation by taking account of the fact that the defendant committed the crime in the state of loss of his ability to control, the fact that the defendant committed a serious apology to the victimized police officer, and appears to have sought a letter by the defendant, and the fact that the defendant has no past record of criminal punishment)

1. The aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [the aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes with the punishment determined by a obstruction of the execution of heavier official duties: Provided, That the lowest sentence shall apply to the punishment determined for a violation of Road Traffic Act (driving of alcohol):

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