logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.12.20 2017고단3232
공무집행방해등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 2, 2017, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties in front of the “C convenience store” located in Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Yangyang-gu. Around October 2, 2017, the Defendant informed E of the Non-public interest doctrine without any justifiable reason.

Whether or not to produce an identification card;

“Absing off time, intending to take a drinking test against traffic accident-related persons, and cutting off his working pocket book to F. F. Absing the traffic safety-related victim F. B. Absing the said F. B. B. the victim E’s cell phone during the course of this Chapter, in which the victim E, who took the b. B. B., took the b. B. B., the victim E, who took the b. B., took the b. B., was sealed by his hand, while taking the b. B.

At around 23:25 on the same day, the Defendant continued to arrest a flagrant offender in the same Dong due to interference with the performance of official duties, and was escorted to the said district, and tried to unboom the body part of the victim G while keeping him/her out of the said district.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted police officers in charge of handling the case or maintaining order, thereby hindering the legitimate execution of official duties.

2. On October 2, 2017, around 23:15, the Defendant damaged public goods, at the front of the convenience point of the above paragraph 1, the Defendant arrested in the act of the above paragraph 1 and went to the patrol vehicle (No. 23 of the patrol vehicle) due to the act of the above paragraph 1, and was escorted to the zone, thereby damaging the Defendant’s seat front and rear seat of the patrol vehicle to the extent of the repair cost.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged public goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to E, G, and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged by patrol vehicles;

1. Article 136 (1) and Article 141 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of obstructing the performance of official duties) concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of penalty;

arrow