공무집행방해등
We reverse the judgment of the court below.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months) is too unreasonable.
2. The defendant has filed an appeal against each judgment of the court below, and the court of the court of the trial has decided to concurrently examine each of the above appeal cases. The crime of each of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single punishment shall be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, each of the judgment of the court below against the defendant
3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
The summary of the crime and evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is the same as the corresponding column of each judgment of the court below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the choice of applicable law for the crime, the choice of punishment for the crime (the obstruction of performance of official duties, the choice of imprisonment), Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of
1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;
1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake, and the degree of injury suffered by the injured party injured by carrying dangerous articles is relatively minor, as well as that of the injury suffered by the injured party during the trial, the above injured party agreed with the injured party.