특수공무집행방해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.
1. The sentence of the lower court (one-year imprisonment) is too unreasonable as to the gist of the grounds for appeal.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio, the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (non-licenseless Driving), the crime of obstructing the performance of special duties, and the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (refluence of drinking), which is an act committed by the court below, shall be punished as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, since there are differences in the subject matter of regulation, scope of regulation, mode of conduct and protection of legal interests. Since the court below dealt with the commercial concurrent relation while applying the statutes, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the number of crimes, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and in this respect, the judgment below cannot be maintained any further.
3. Thus, the court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts and evidence against the defendant recognized by this court is identical to the facts constituting the crime of the original judgment, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the facts constituting an offense, Articles 152 subparag. 1 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act (non-licensed driving), Articles 144(1) and 136(1) of the Criminal Act (Crimes of obstructing the performance of special official duties), Articles 148-2(1)2 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, and each decision of imprisonment with prison labor;
1. The rationale for sentencing Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes is that the Defendant repents his mistake and reflects his fault, and the payment of the damaged vehicle repair cost is advantageous.
However, the defendant is a vehicle to avoid detection of drinking or non-licensed driving by the police.