(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2020.10.14 2020고단1962

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) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2020.10.14 2020고단1962

공무집행방해

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 12, 2020, the Defendant: (a) around 21:17, at the Defendant’s house located in D on July 12, 2020, tried to check the inside in detail in order to ascertain whether there is a person flying away from D’s house after receiving the Defendant’s report that “the inside house was able to be able to be able to be able to have his house connected; (b) the head of the Gu/Si/Gun police station’s police box sent out upon the Defendant’s report that “the head of the Gu/Si/Gun police station went back to the outside; and (c) the head of the Gu/Si/Gun police station, upon the receipt of the Defendant’s report that “the head of the Gu/Si/Gun sent back to the outside.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers on the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Partial statement of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police on D;

1. 112. Descriptions of the 112 Reporting Statement and investigation report; and

1. On-site images and defense counsel denies the facts charged that the defendant did not exercise the same violence as the facts charged against D.

However, it is consistent and very detailed that the statement by the victimized police officer on the situation at which the police officer was called to the apartment of the defendant, the conversation between the defendant and the damaged police officer with the opposite location, the reason and method that the victimized police officer attempted to look at the ward of the apartment, the response of the defendant, etc. is consistent and very specific. However, there is no motive for the victimized police officer to make a false statement at all, and it is believed that the statement corresponds to the facts charged.

The testimony of E, who was dispatched to the apartment of the defendant, along with the victimized police officers, is consistent with the statement of the victimized police officers, raising the credibility of the statement.

The currency of the defendant and the defendant in receipt of 112 reports.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2015.07.17 2015고단382

-인천지방법원 2018.04.19 2017고단7710

-서울북부지방법원 2019.11.14 2019고단1148

-대구지방법원 2018.12.06 2018고정818

-의정부지방법원 2019.02.12 2018고단4293