Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 29, 2016, the Defendant: (a) taken a taxi on the part of the Victim B (57 taxes) operating under the 22:45 on the same day; (b) arrived at the front of the 662 modern department store DCbling Co., Ltd., Guro-gu, Seoul, the purpose of which is around 22:45 on the same day; and (c) attempted to escape without paying a taxi fee to stop the victim; (d) put the victim into the Plaintiff’s arms and cab; and (e) put the victim into the Plaintiff’s bath.

Accordingly, the Defendant, upon receiving the victim’s 112 report from January 29, 2016, obstructed the victim’s taxi operation by force for about 15 minutes, from January 29, 2016 to 22:59.

2. Whether the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties is a police officer, at the same time, at the same place as the above paragraph, and at C District Racing D (29C) dispatched upon receipt of a 112 report.

X Map gum, “A gum,” and assaulted the victim’s left side at one time.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. B written statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photograph victims D;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 316(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties), and the selection of fines for the 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 crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which prevents the Defendant from running a taxi under the influence of alcohol, and assaulted by the police officer when he was dispatched after receiving a report, and the nature of the crime is not that of the police officer.

However, the sentencing shown in the records and changes theory, such as the fact that the defendant makes a confession of his mistake and reflects, that the victim B of the obstruction of business does not want the punishment of the defendant, that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment before, and that there is no record of criminal punishment.