A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 23:45, 2015, the Defendant: (a) committed an act of disturbance of drinking at the convenience store located in the 22:48 on the same day, and (b) received notification as a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, and (c) continued to go back to the said district on several occasions as the said district, and (d) received a recommendation for returning back to the said district, and (e) received a notification as a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act on September 23:45, 2015, the Defendant sent a disturbance to the police officer who works there at the said district, and (e) recommended the Defendant to return home after guiding the Defendant in the front door of the said district, and (e) recommended him to return home by “Chewing, fices,” etc., and interfere with F’s legitimate performance of duties concerning police officer’s work at the expense of one f’s left chest on the ground of drinking.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement;

1. Photographs;

1. On-site video CDs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to internal reports (CCTV video and screen pictures);

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act for the suspended sentence [the scope of recommendation] Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act where the degree of violence, intimidation, and deceptive scheme is minor in the mitigated area (one month to eight months), [the special mitigated person] [the decision of sentence] where the defendant committed the crime of this case even though there has been such a summary power, the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case is disadvantageous, or there is against the defendant's awareness of committing the crime and wrong, and the cross-compact accompanied by the formation of the complex part suffering by the defendant seems to have affected the crime of this case, and the degree of the exercise of the tangible power is minor.