(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.02.15 2018노3815 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.02.15 2018노3815

업무방해등

Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed on the guilty part of the lower judgment on the grounds of mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing, and the prosecutor appealed on the guilty part of the lower judgment. As to the acquittal portion of the lower judgment, the Defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal, and thus, the aforementioned acquittal portion was excluded from the subject of this

Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction part of the judgment below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of each of the facts stated in the lower judgment, mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine (defendants) committed assaults among the facts charged as indicated in the lower judgment, 2016 Highest 8268, 2017 Highest 2748, 2017 Highest 7946, 2017 Highest 8751, 2017 Highest 8917, and insults was committed in the process of resisting the Defendant to the State agency which was inspecting the Defendant, and evidence was also fabricated by the State agency, and the lower court’s witness was also a person who inspected the Defendant, but the Defendant was also a witness without finances.

In addition, among the remaining criminal facts, the obstruction of performance of official duties was resistanceed to the execution of official duties, there was justifiable reason, and the obstruction of official duties was merely a resistance to unfair treatment, and thus did not reach the degree of interference with official duties. Each insult did not have an intent to insult a specific individual.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a judgment of conviction against the defendant, and the court below erred by misunderstanding the above facts or misunderstanding the legal principles.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (public prosecutor and the defendant) by the court below is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Judgment on mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is rendered by the Defendant.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2013.01.30 2012노4617

-제주지방법원 2021.04.08 2020노927

-광주지방법원 2016.11.24 2016노2071

-부산고등법원 2015.04.16 2014노728

-대전지방법원 2015.12.10 2015노1645