(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.01.09 2012노3956 | 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) 대구지방법원 2014.01.09 2012노3956

공무집행방해

Text

The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The defendant above.

Reasons

1. The accused of the grounds for appeal does not assault a police officer;

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the following facts are acknowledged. From the F main point operated by the Defendant and B, in the course of drinking and calculating by ordering alcohol and alcohol, etc. at the F main point operated by the Defendant and B, there was a trial cost as a matter of the J and the alcohol value that the Defendant and B had worked in the relevant place. It is unclear whether G, a business owner, determined that the Defendant and B had no intent to pay the alcohol value at a discretion, and reported it to the police agency (whether or not the G was directly required to report).

2) Upon receipt of a report, I and L were called to F main points, and the Defendant: (a) stated that I called “the police officer goes to a drinking house on the ground of son”; and (b) I performed the act of pushing I with her hand and her flabing her bat (in relation thereto, J stated in the lower court’s judgment that the Defendant was her flabing, and stated in the court below that there was an action that the police officer was her flabing with her chest by hand, although it does not know that the Defendant was her flabing.

A) Accordingly, I arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender under the suspicion of obstruction of the performance of official duties, and he was unable to wear the Defendant. The Defendant and the Defendant’s defense counsel partly consistent with the police officer, G, and J’s statements. The Defendant and the Defendant’s defense counsel expressed that B attempted to arrest the Defendant as well as B, who called “I” and “B.” The police officers called up to the Defendant who called up for the Defendant at the same time when they arrested the Defendant. The Defendant and the Defendant’s defense counsel expressed that B did not inform the Defendant of the so-called doctrine, while arresting the Defendant, the police officer, G, and J.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.06.18 2012고정2180

-광주지방법원 2016.10.25 2016노513

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2015.09.18 2015고단1020

-광주지방법원 2015.02.12 2014고단4180

-부산지방법원 2016.06.03 2016노345