공무집행방해
Acquittal of the accused shall be acquitted.
1. Around 07:50 on July 26, 2013, the Defendant: (a) obstructed police officers’ lawful performance of duties in relation to police officers’ suppression and dispatch of 112 vehicles by assaulting, such as a slope belonging to D District Unit of Seoul Central Police Station D in Seoul Central Police Station, and a slopeF, who was called out after having received 112 reports on the street in front of the C playter located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu; and (b) listening to the statements and criminal intent that H was assaulted by the victim at the scene; and (c) arresting H as an offender in the act of committing a crime and attempting to take the patrol at the scene, thereby preventing him/her from carrying out the patrol at the patrol vehicle.
2. According to the records, on March 17, 2014, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1,00,000 for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties at the Seoul Central District Court, and on April 19, 2014, the above summary order became final and conclusive. The facts constituting the crime of the above summary order at issue are as follows: “The Defendant: (a) the police officer of the Seoul Central Police Station, who was dispatched to the scene upon receiving a report of assault, arrested the Defendant’s friendship H on the charge of assault, and prevented the Defendant from carrying the Defendant from carrying the Defendant the defect that the F of the Police Station, who was dispatched to the scene, tried to take on the patrol vehicle by arresting the Defendant’s friendship on the back of the patrol vehicle’s driver’s seat, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties as to criminal investigation, etc. by assaulting the F’s chest, etc., and then obstructing the police officer’s performance of duties.”
According to the facts found above, the facts charged in this case that the above summary order had become final and conclusive shall be related to the same crime in light of the date, time, place, and form of the crime, etc., and the basic facts are identical. Thus, it is reasonable to view that there is a relationship of single crime under the substantive law.
Therefore, the effect of the above final summary order also extends to the facts charged in this case conducted prior to its issuance.