beta
(영문) 부산고등법원 (창원) 2014.05.14 2013노446

공무집행방해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not commit a crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties, insult, violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, or obstruction of business among the crimes entered in the criminal facts, the lower court erred by misunderstanding the fact that the lower court found the Defendant guilty, thereby adversely affecting

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant also asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the above assertion in its reasoning under the title of “determination on the Defendant and his/her defense counsel’s assertion.” Examining the lower court’s judgment closely and closely with the evidence, the aforementioned determination is justifiable. 2) In particular, in relation to the fact of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act), the P who observed the scene immediately after the crime, appeared as a witness in the lower court, and made a statement consistent with

3. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is rejected.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, there are relatively minor elements of sentencing, such as the victim F’s indecent act by force, the degree of injury to the victim K is not severe, and the defendant has no record of heavy punishment exceeding the fine.

However, the Defendant committed an offense, such as assaulting, insulting, or harming a police officer who was subject to the police officer's restraint who was dispatched to the scene of disturbance due to drinking conditions, and the nature of the offense is not good. Nevertheless, the Defendant's overall denial of his crime and lack of color of reflectiveness presented by sentencing guidelines, and the victims' agreement with F, I, K, and police officers or it was impossible for the victims to reach an agreement or obtain a letter.