[공무집행방해][집5(1)형,029]
Performance of Official Duties
If the director of the branch office of a district court is accommodated and posted in the same room as the director of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch
Article 136 of the Criminal Act
Defendant
The Gwangju District Court of the first instance, the Gwangju High Court of the second instance.
The main body is dismissed.
The court below found that there was an error in law by misunderstanding the defendant's material facts on the part of the non-indicted 1 in violation of the law. In other words, the defendant was appointed to the Gwangju District Court on June 20, 428, and the chief of the non-indicted 1's office and the non-indicted 1's office clerk's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 6's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 6's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 2's office's non-2's non-indicted
According to the statement of facts in the first instance judgment cited by the original judgment in the court room, the defendant was admitted as legitimate evidence on April 17, 4289 as to the non-indicted 1 in office, such as visiting with the support clerk (name omitted) around 2:10 p.m. (name omitted) around 2:0 p.m. on April 17, 4289, and supervising the general library affairs at the time, etc., to interfere with the performance of his official duties by the head of the Dong office. In a case where the support clerk and the general office clerk are accommodated and posted in the same room as the head of the clerk office, the chief of the Seo-gu office has the position and authority to guide and supervise the subordinate employees without a simple time during the office hours. Thus, even if the director of the Seo-gu office is not in actual execution of any specific affairs, it is reasonable to interpret that the director of the division during the prescribed execution period is in the process of supervising his office, and if considering the records in light of the records, he can not be recognized as an act of intimidation.
The second point is that the defendant is found guilty of the timely facts at the time of the original trial, even if he is found guilty of the defendant, he worked in the Gwangju District Court for 30 years as the head of the Gwangju District Court, and thought that the court staff who continued to receive the mobilization (name omitted), the head of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch.
However, if the motive, method, the circumstances at the time of the crime and all other circumstances recorded in the records are taken into account, it is not reasonable for the court below to hold that there is a significant reason to recognize it as reasonable and unfair.
It is decided as per Disposition by applying Article 390 of the Criminal Procedure Act to the person.
Justices Kim Byung-ro (Presiding Justice)