logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.03.29 2017고단7589
공무집행방해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 30, 2017, the Defendant sent a call with a large voice from D convenience points located in Ssung C around 01:40 on October 30, 2017.

“A police officer, who received a report, received a demand from the E District F InspectorF to refrain from an act of disturbance and return home.”

The Defendant, without any particular reason, filed a report.

C C. The term “franchise” refers to “franchise franchise”, and the fbucks part of the F F’s bucks, f’s chest part with bags bucked, f’s chest part by hand, and f’s chest part by hand, which continued to arrive at the scene, was assaulted 4 times in flue’s chest part by hand.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the handling of reported cases and maintenance of order by the assistantF and patrolmen.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and F;

1. A H statement;

1. 112 A list of reported cases;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes accompanying CCTV images;

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act concerning the ordinary concurrent crimes (a punishment imposed on a person who has committed a crime with heavier punishment than that of a crime)

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, committed an assault against a police officer who puts his/her duty in prison, thereby impairing the public authority with respect to the enforcement of the law.

The Defendant was unable to cause a disturbance by notifying police officers of the personal information of the reported person at the time, and the degree of the exercise of force was not somewhat weak, and thus, the police officers dispatched first requested support, but continued to assault the police officers, and the fraud of the police officers performing official duties, and the failure to perform official duties would have been significantly lowered.

The Defendant, on May 15, 2017, was sentenced to suspension of indictment on the grounds of assault, but later, this is re-written.

arrow