logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.12.08 2017고단4829
공무집행방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Around September 13, 2017, the Defendant insultd the E Hospital located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul), and “Leseers are in the floor because of personnel influence,” at the E Hospital located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

“A” call to the Defendant’s wife to return the Defendant, who is a public official of the police officer of the F District Police Station of the Seoul Yongpo Police Station, called the Defendant upon receipt of the report 112, and the victim H called the Defendant’s wife, and the hospital safety management personnel are heard by the Defendant’s wife, and the victims are flicked by a large sound;

It can be a fluorous omission in receiving a monthly payment from the police.

“Publicly insulting victims by referring to “......”

2. The Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties on the same day, at the places described in paragraph 1 at around 04:50 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) was transferred to her wife G and patrolman to her wife; (b) was to return to the earth; (c) was to have the Defendant returned to the earth; (d) was tightly her body by carrying the police officer’s body by carrying with her body while carrying with her body; and (c) was on the front left of the patrol vehicle and on the back of the patrol vehicle; and (d) was forced to open the back seat of her patrol vehicle and opened it on the back seat, and thereafter, “this son and the inside of the Republic of Korea”.

G and H interfered with the above G and H's getting on and return to patrol cars by assault, such as sound "I ambal ..."

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement of the J;

1. Statement of the police statement of H by the police officer for senior patrol officer G or patrol officer;

1. Application of investigation reports (ablphone images) and photographs, motion picture CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is based on the order of provisional payment.

arrow