특수공무집행방해치사등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant: The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. A prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (not guilty part of the grounds for appeal) the Defendant, without wearing a safety appearance at the time of the instant case, found the victim, who was a police officer, and found the possibility of collision, and proceeded with the speed and direction of the Otoba in order to avoid control, and led to the shock of the victim. As such, dolusence of assault against the Defendant is recognized. Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that the Defendant did not sufficiently prove the Defendant’s intent of assault against the victim. Thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment. (2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds that the Defendant’s primary charge of this case was too unrecepted
2. Determination
A. On November 15, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 16:12, the summary of the facts charged in the charge of the non-guilty part of the reasoning of the indictment (the primary charge) the Defendant, at around 16:12, 2013, driven an unregistered 124CC at the front of the apartment complex 1 complex in Eunpyeong-dong, Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul, 595 Samsung C, and proceeded at a speed of about 60 km from the long distance of the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to a two-lane of the Gu flag tunnel. In such a case, in the front bank, the Victim C (the police officer of the Seoul Pyeongtaek Police Station) who is a police officer of the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Police Station (the police officer of the age of 51) discovered the Defendant’s driving of the non-registered lebane without wearing a safety mother, and requested the Defendant to stop selling from the 4-lane to the second two-lane.
Therefore, the Defendant could have predicted the fact that the victim could be shocked into the stoke in the event that the Defendant continued to proceed with the stoke in light of the speed of the stoke, the passage of the stoke, the passage of the victim, etc.