beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.09.22 2016고단1937

공무집행방해등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 28, 2016, at around 01:00, the Defendant visited the D’s box located in Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, to the said box at the expense of the E-business taxi driver F and fee, and subsequently, was solicited by the victim G, who was the police officer assigned to the said box, to invalid home from the above victim G, “I Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YY YY

how much it is drinking or not.

Chewing strings. There is no sarnife.

Chewing flachie, here

“Along with a sound, the breath of the above victim was spathed, and the victim was spawned with spawn, and the victim was spawned for approximately two weeks of treatment.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers, and at the same time injured the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing injury photographs;

1. Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (Punishments imposed on the crimes of serious injury);

1. Reasons for sentencing selective sentence of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Scope of recommended sentences on the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to April, up to June, the basic area (up to one year and six months) for types 1 (general injury) from the date of prison labor for up to one year and June - Special mitigated persons: Non-members of punishment - Special aggravated persons: In cases of interference with the execution of public duties;

2. Where the Defendant did not pay a taxi fee, thereby obstructing the police officer’s performance of official duties and causing injury to the police station, and the offender’s attitude toward the public authority is apparent, such as the obstruction of the execution of official duties by obstructing the performance of official duties, and having been punished by a fine due to obstruction of the execution of duties, damage to public documents, etc., and, in addition, he/she is highly likely to repeat the crime in this case, he/she would be subject to a heavy punishment in the instant case by force, such as the number of criminal records punished for violent crimes.

On the other hand, the defendant suffered damage immediately after the crime of this case.