beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (two months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
2. The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is an offense that undermines the function of the State by nullifying a legitimate exercise of public authority, and there is a need to strictly punish the crime. The defendant's face of a police officer who was requested by the police officer to get out of the patrol vehicle and walking the bridge part, etc. is not good in light of the method of crime or the mode of action, and the fact that the defendant has been punished as a fine for the same kind of crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.
However, the fact that the defendant has been recognized as committing a crime and has a depth divided, and that the defendant has some circumstances to take into account the circumstances of the crime such as drinking up to the time of the instant case (Evidence No. 23 of the evidence record), and that the former Support Center for the Integration of Guro Addiction after the instant case has made efforts to provide counseling, etc., and that the defendant has no criminal records punished by a suspended sentence of imprisonment or a heavier punishment, and has been employed as a teaching staff at the I University, and has a family member to support the defendant, and that the defendant has family members and family members of the defendant, as well as the victim police officers are asserting the preference to the defendant.
In addition, taking into account various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s career, character and conduct, environment, health status, family relationship, social relationship, and circumstances after the crime, it seems reasonable to allow the Defendant to have an opportunity of reflect while taking the disposition of fine only once. Thus, the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the following judgment is rendered again after pleading.
Criminal facts.