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

1. On June 11, 2015, the Defendant: (a) performed an act of obstruction of performance of official duties without permission on the street in front of the distance of post offices located on the 45-ro, Sinsking-si; (b) was exposed to the police officers of the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency, who were working for traffic control at the same time, and was asked to present their identification cards; (c) the Defendant: (d) expressed Dao to B, who was dissatisfied with the request for presentation of identification cards; and (d) expressed that “if the police officers assigned to the National Police Agency, who were working for traffic control with B, were immediately unable to do so; and (d) the police officers of the same National Police Agency, who were working for the traffic control with B at the near place, sent the Dao in order to prevent the Defendant, “I will see it to be so that you will see it “I will see it to be,” and (d) caused Dao’s shoulder and breast part by hand, over five minutes.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties by police officers.

2. An alien staying in the Republic of Korea in violation of the Immigration Control Act shall always carry a passport, seafarers¡¯ identity document, entry permit for foreigners, alien registration certificate, or landing permit (hereinafter referred to as " passport, etc."), and an immigration control official or authorized public official shall present a passport, etc. upon request for presentation of a passport, etc

Nevertheless, the Defendant violated the Immigration Control Act by not carrying a passport, etc. on the ground that the police officer B belonging to the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency was exposed to unauthorized crossing at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) but did not carry it without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in court (the defendant asserts that he has no memory in alcohol, but the records show that the defendant's drinking is recognized, but it is difficult to see that the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to that reason, and the defendant's assertion is without merit)

1. Each police statement concerning B and C;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Each written statement prepared D and E;

1. A charge; and