When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

1. The Defendant, on November 6, 2015, was off 08:10, in front of the so-called “mathrogate in Seoul Jongno-gu, and was reported and obstructed the passage of vehicles, and the victim D, a police officer of the C police box affiliated with the police box called up, who was called up after being reported and obstructed the passage of vehicles, was prevented by the Defendant, and the victim D, who was the police officer belonging to the Jongno-gu, safeguarded by a large number of traffic visitors, during the victim’s compliance.

In a large sense, the victim openly insultingd the victim, such as “a dog,” etc.

2. The Defendant violated the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act: (a) while drunked at a police box in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul from November 6, 2015 to November 08:15, 09:00, the Defendant got the police officers to go against the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act; (b) while drinking at the police box in Jongno-gu, Jongno-gu, Seoul.

For about 45 minutes, such as taking a bath, fluence, etc., and spreading water in the cupped World, and was arrested in the act of committing the crime as such, and was arrested in the act of committing the crime in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Kim Chang-gu, Seoul, and continued to be transferred to the office of the Kim Jong-gu, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Seoul, for the same day until 09:50 on the same day, it was difficult to avoid disturbance, such as taking a bath, taking a bath, and dusting the water of the purified flag.

Accordingly, the defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, forced or scamed by very rough words and conducts at government offices.

3. The Defendant damaged public goods, as described in paragraph 2, destroyed that the market price was 2.50,000 won by putting scam in paper and World Cup and scam in the office of the Seoul Hyeung Police Station in order to prevent the Defendant from operating a monitor equivalent to 250,000 won in the computer for business.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged computer monitors, which are goods used by public offices.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement (with respect to damage to goods for public use, partial statement in court);

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Each police statement made in relation to G or D;

1. CCTV screen images subject to revocation of the owner of a government office;

1. Monitoring-related photographs (the Defendant alleged to the effect that he did not blick or dump water in the monitor, but did not blickly drums, such as the witness F’s legal statement and CCTV video contents.