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

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 10:00 on August 18, 2013, the Defendant argued that the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, was subject to violence against the E-district of the Gwangju Northern Police Station E-gu, Gwangju, which called “I kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn kn n

The Defendant continued to set the door to get on the Hadern G belonging to the above Edern G with the above F, and prevented him from putting the door up to five minutes, and occupied the 20 minutes of the patrol car without permission by putting the door to the Hadern G with the above Hadern G one time, and her seated into the Hadern G with the above Hadern G with the above Hadern G, and then throw the door down to the Hadern.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A written statement of I;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant's assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was that the defendant made a statement that he had no memory at the time of the crime of this case, and thus, he was in the state of mental disorder or mental disorder. Thus, according to the records of this case, although the defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, it is recognized that he had no ability to discern things or make a decision.

As it seems that it did not seem to have reached a state of or weakness, the defendant.