Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 600,000 won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, at around 01:30 on May 14, 2017, entered the C District located in Kimhae-si B with the inside of the said District, and, under the influence of alcohol, has to “D as soon as possible” with a large sound without any justifiable reason.

"," and "I ambier" mean "I ambier," and the police officers do not comply with the recommendations made by the police officers to return home to the defendant and do so to police officers, such as B, etc., and do so with a large voice.

n't do this work.

No police officer may do so.

“I,” and “I, in accordance with the spirit of this title, I think.”

In other words, it was difficult to bring a disturbance for about 3 hours, such as “,” etc.

Accordingly, the defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, led to very rough words and actions by public offices.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of F’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on the Punishment of Minor Offenses and Article 3 (3) 1 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (Optional to the punishment);

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

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, committed a second offense without being aware of the fact that he had been punished twice for the same kind of crime.

All of the above two preceding crimes committed by the same police station. In particular, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the grace period after being sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor due to a crime of interference with the execution of official duties committed against a police official at the same place in the same year.

However, the defendant is going to reflect misunderstanding in depth and not repeat again.

It appears that it was a crime that has committed a contingency after drinking, and the method and attitude of the state revocation column are not to be considered to be inferior.

The defendant can also be considered as a favorable condition for his old occupation.

In addition, the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances, and circumstances after the crime, shall be comprehensively considered as the order.