logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.10.30 2014고단7259
공무집행방해
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 8, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 23:50 on August 23, 2014, in the “F” located on the first floor of Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul E-12, which was reported and sent by the Defendant to the Defendant, used the Defendant to stop a fighting; (b) the Defendant’s slope belonging to the Seoul Hyeung Police Station G District G District, which was called out after having received a notification of 12 that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, sent the Defendant a bath view that “I am, sar, sar? I am? I am? I am, I am you am you am back with the Defendant’s hand, and assaulted the face part of the above D’s face by drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the suppression of police officers' crimes and handling of 112 reported cases.

2. Around 02:00 on August 9, 2014, the Defendant of the obstruction of the performance of official duties of police officers H, at the waiting room for civil petitioners of the Seoul beneficiary police station located in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Seoul, 48-57, who arrested a flagrant offender on the same background as the mentioned in the foregoing paragraph (1), and was released and returned to the Republic of Korea after completing an investigation, the Defendant expressed his/her gate and chair in his/her hand in the waiting room for the above civil petitioners, and expressed his/her desire to return home from the slope H belonging to the above police station while on duty at the time, and expressed his/her desire to “Cp nick k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k kn

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the maintenance of order in government offices.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement made to D and H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the I;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine concerning the crime;

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 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act appears to have led to the instant crime by drinking, and the police station of this case after the instant crime was found to have been committed by the injured police officers.

arrow