특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(운전자폭행등)등
1. The judgment below is reversed.
2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months;
3.Provided, That for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that of the lower court’s punishment (six months of imprisonment) excessively unreasonable.
2. The crime of this case was committed on the part of the victim's chest while the defendant was on board a taxi driven by the victim E while taking the defendant, and the police officer, upon receiving the victim's report, required the defendant to get the defendant to get off the taxi and ask his personal information, and assault the above police officer one time to take off the part of the police officer's left hand, such as drinking, while taking a bath to the above police officer, and interfere with the police officer's performance of duties once by taking a bath to the police officer after he was arrested in the act of this case. Thus, the crime of this case committed a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Drivers, etc.) in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, among the crimes of this case, has a risk of causing damage to the lives, bodies, and property of many unspecified people. Since the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties among the crimes of this case infringed public authority, it is necessary for the defendant to be punished for obstruction of performance of official duties by a court, such as a fine, etc.
However, in light of the above favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s full recognition of the instant crime and the violation of it at the investigation stage, the Defendant agreed with the victim E at the investigation stage, the police officers agreed not to have the Defendant punished, the Defendant was detained for three months, and the Defendant was detained for three months, and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable.
Therefore, the defendant's argument is justified.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is reasonable.