[특수공무집행방해치상,폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반,공용물건손상][공1993.10.1.(953),2484]
The meaning of "after-person committing a crime" under Article 211 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
Article 211 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to cases where it is evident that a person who is arrested is an offender immediately after the commission of the crime, in view of the person who is in charge of the crime, and if it is clearly recognized that there is evidence to regard the person who is arrested as time or place as the offender who has committed the crime, he/she may be deemed as a flagrant offender.
Article 211(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Lee Gyeong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)
Defendant
Defendant
Attorney Lee E-Woo
Seoul High Court Decision 92No3324 delivered on March 5, 1993
The appeal is dismissed.
1. As to the second ground for appeal
The court below did not have any illegality, such as the theory of lawsuit, on the grounds that the defendant acknowledged the fact that the defendant injured the police officer's wrong return as a pipe. Thus, there is no reason to discuss it.
2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1
Article 211(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to cases where it is evident that a person who is arrested is a criminal immediately after the commission of the crime is completed, and if it is clearly recognized that there is evidence to regard the person who is arrested as time or place to be a criminal who has committed the crime, he/she may be deemed a flagrant offender (see Supreme Court Decision 91Do1314 delivered on September 24, 191).
The court below found that the defendant's act of visiting 112 after receiving the above 112 report to arrest the defendant is a flagrant offender, and there is no reason to hold that the defendant's act of arresting the defendant is justified in accordance with the above opinion of the party members, and therefore, the act of visiting 10 minutes after leaving 10 minutes from the front of the school in Seongdong-gu, Seoul and walking a victim-style vehicle in Korea, and the place is also the playground of the above school adjacent to the scene of the crime, and the victim's relatives reported 112, and the above victim's relatives reported 112 and had the police officers pointed out and arrested the defendant during the above report while she continued to monitor her escape. The court below decided that the defendant is a flagrant offender, and therefore, it is justified in accordance with the above opinion of the party members.
3. The Defendant filed an appeal against the Defendant against the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and the damage to public goods, but the Defendant did not state the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal and did not submit a statement of grounds for appeal within the lawful period. Therefore, this part of the appeal is without merit
4. The appeal shall be dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)