Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 3, 2015, at around 21:30, the Defendant: (a) took a bath in a restaurant located in Suwon-gu Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, D; (b) took an order for food and drink; and (c) took a bath for female employees in a restaurant, including the victim D (the victim D) to “this son”; and (d) took a bath for the victim’s body to stop continuously, and even if the victim’s body was frighted, the Defendant continued to stop the boom; (c) continued to stop the boom; and (d) interfered with the victim’s duties by putting force on the part of the consignee who the Defendant was seated in the restaurant, such as cutting down the boom by drinking and cutting down the bucks into arms, thereby hindering the victim’s duties by force.

2. The Defendant: (a) placed an order for alcoholic beverages with no intent or capacity to pay the food cost at the same time and place as that set forth in the preceding paragraph; and (b) received pecuniary benefits by failing to pay the food cost of KRW 26,000 on the basis of the victim D who demanded the payment of the food cost.

3. In a case where the victim E district police officers sent out after receiving a report at the same date and time and place as set forth in paragraph (1), and where the victim E district police officers were able to take a bath and invalid home, the Defendant made a public insult of the victim, such as taking the reporter and the victim’s desire to read “the victim must do so.”

4. On January 3, 2015, the Defendant, from around 23:20 to 23:50 on the same day, committed an act of disturbance of revocation by a governmental office, such as: (a) the police officer, who was engaged in business operations, such as: (b) the Defendant, who was arrested in a flagrant act within the Suwon Police Station E zone from around 23:20 to around 23:50 of the same day, on the ground that he was arrested in a flagrant act in the state of taking place; and (c) the Defendant, who was inside the E zone Defendant, a government office, was arrested in the state of taking place; and (d) the police officer, who was carrying out business affairs

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Each statement of D, G and H;

1. On-site photographs;

1. A receipt for the value of alcoholic beverages;