logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.12.21 2018고단2401
공무집행방해
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 23, 2018, at around 03:22, the Defendant heard the horses to issue a light crime Sticker due to the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act due to nearby disturbance from the E District F, who was called up with 112 reports, at around 03:2, “D” restaurant located in Sinpo City, the Defendant: (a) heard from the E District F, who was called up with 112, that he would issue a light crime Sticker due to nearby disturbance; and (b) stated the F, “F, sprinke, sprinke,” and she expressed to the said F, “F, spicked, spick.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of police officers' duties concerning 112 reporting processing affairs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. A statement of 112 reported case processing (Evidence No. 15 of evidence list);

1. Videos of cell phone images CDs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of photograph (Evidence 7);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment.

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (see, e.g., “reasons for sentencing” as follows)

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Provide community service and attend lecture was committed by the police officer who was called to the scene after receiving 112 report that the defendant would have a large voice in the old while under the influence of alcohol, and thus, the police officer failed to return home voluntarily from the police officer who was called to the site. Accordingly, the police officer failed to receive from the police officer the responsibility for the crime of this case in light of the nature and circumstances of the crime of this case, the method and manner of the crime of this case, and the circumstances that the police officer failed to receive from the police officer until now, by assaulting the police officer, such as the police officer's breast part of the breast part of the police officer at hand, such as the police officer's walking part of the police officer at hand and walking the part of the police officer at one time due to the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act due to disturbance.

arrow