logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.02.21 2017고단3093
공무집행방해
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 8, 2017, the Defendant: (a) reported at the Defendant’s house located in Seoyang-gu D3, Seoyang-gu, 302 Dong 305, and received 112 a report to the effect that domestic violence occurred; and (b) was asked to ask questions about the instant situation from F to the police officer affiliated with the Goyang-gu, Police Station E District; (c) the Defendant called “Jin-gu,” called “Jin-gu,” and the Defendant obstructed the police officer’s lawful performance of duties concerning the police officer’s 112 reporting duties by placing the Defendant’s arms onto the door after closing the front door.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. Investigation report (including submission of photographs of damage police officers and photographs attached thereto);

1. The 112 Report Processing List of the 112 Report Case (the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the FF's act cannot be regarded as legitimate execution of official duties because the F F F's attempt to close the door was prevented by failing to comply with the defendant's request for presentation of his identification card, and the F's attempt was carried out between the defendant and F's door. However, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the F's act cannot be viewed as legitimate execution of official duties. However, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the police officer F and G at the time of the instant case were dispatched to the site after receiving 112 report to the effect that there was domestic violence at the defendant's home. G presented a police identification card to the defendant's request for presentation of his identification card; G was presented with the reason or purpose to enter the defendant's house; it was objectively apparent that F and G had assaulted the defendant's wife; and it was recognized that the defendant could have sufficiently known such circumstances; and it was not presented police identification card.

Therefore, the above argument cannot be accepted as illegal since the execution of duties cannot be deemed to be illegal.

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime and Article 136 of the choice of punishment.

arrow