A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six 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.

Criminal facts

1. On February 2, 2016, around 01:30 on February 2, 2016, the Defendant was engaged in “C” restaurant located in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the fact was engaged in as if he did not have any intent or ability to pay the price despite the issuance of an order for alcohol and alcohol, and ordered the victim D, who is an employee of the above restaurant, to pay the price. The Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 19,000 on the market price from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. At the same time and place as Paragraph 1, the Defendant: (a) 1, the victim D, an employee of the restaurant, took a bath, fluencing the sound, gathering the brue bottle, blocking the floor, and raising the kimchi, thereby allowing approximately 30 minutes of the meals in the restaurant.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

3. On February 2, 2016, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the same place as Paragraph 1, around 02:15, at the same time, and at the same time, at the 112-reported 112, the Defendant assaulted the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties in relation to the prevention, suppression, and investigation of the crime, such as cutting away from the police officer F of the police station E zone belonging to Seoul, Guro-gu, Seoul, where he was called up with the 112 report, cutting away from the police officer F of the police station, putting him away from drinking, displaying him, and

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Determination of the Defendant’s assertion of D’s written statement is that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case, and the situation was not well memory.

It appears that there was a state of mental disorder.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant can be identified at the time of this case that he drinks and was in a state of drinking. Thus, Article 10(3) of the Criminal Act is applied to the defendant who voluntarily drinks and was in a state of drinking at the time of this case.