beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2016.05.26 2015고단898

업무방해등

Text

1. The punishment of the defendant shall be eight months;

2.Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant, on September 19, 2015, 20:35 on September 2015, 2015, hereinafter the Defendant: (a) made a cT photographing at the D general hospital emergency room located in Jin-si, Jin-si; (b) made the cT photographing at the D general hospital emergency room; and (c) made the cT photographing at that place

Before doing so, the above doctor took a bath, and assaulted the victim F.(27) who was receiving treatment at the above doctor once a drinking.

2. On September 19, 2015, at around 20:35, the Defendant: (a) 20:35, at the D general hospital emergency room operated by the Victim G in Jin-si, the Defendant: (b) took a bath for a doctor as prescribed in paragraph (1); (c) took the patient F as his/her hand; and (d) took the patient’s medical house in his/her place for about 25 minutes from around 21:00 on the same day; and (c) was removed from the above emergency room, the head of the security division of the above hospital, and became out of the said emergency room.

The air conditioner gets out of the air conditioner, walking out of the air conditioner.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the emergency room treatment of the victimized person by force.

3. On September 19, 2015, at the front of the emergency room, the Defendant: (a) 112 reported that the patient in an emergency room was satisfing a disturbance, such as paragraph (2) on September 21, 2015; and (b) taken the 112 report that the patient in an emergency room was satisfing the sat; (c) taken the satisfing from J and K police officer, who called the police officer to the place; and (d) taken the satisfing that the Defendant “satisfing, satfing, and satt the police officer’s right buckbucks at once, and satfing at the face of K. Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression, and investigation of the police officer’s crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to H, K, J, and F;

1. Application of on-site photographs, photographs of damaged parts, CCTV-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence), Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of official duties), and Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of official duties) of the choice of punishment