(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.02.14 2018노1463

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) 서울북부지방법원 2019.02.14 2018노1463

공무집행방해

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no fact that the Defendant had committed a mistake of facts D.

B. In light of the legal principles, it cannot be deemed legitimate execution of official duties to arbitrarily release the defendant without taking measures such as joining the defendant as a crime of non-compliance with the eviction of the defendant. Thus, even if the defendant exercised somewhat tangible power to resist it, it cannot be punished as obstruction of performance of official duties.

C. The lower court’s sentence (six months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, especially CCTV CD images, the fact that the defendant took the left face of D one time by hand in front of the Cdistrict entrance at the time of the decision of the court below is recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. Regarding the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence are as follows: (i) the Defendant did not take a measure to leave the zone upon arrival of the zone; (ii) the Defendant took a measure to leave the zone only after a lapse of about 2 hours and 30 minutes after arrival of the zone zone; (iii) despite the police officer’s sufficient consultation with the Defendant within the zone for the above 2 hours and 30 minutes, the Defendant continuously asserts only his/her requirements; (iv) during the consultation process, the police officer took a monitor in the zone while leaving the zone; and (v) in the course of the measures to leave the zone, there are no circumstances to deem that the police officer only went out of the zone while leaving the zone and exercised excessive tangible power (in the process of leaving the zone zone to the outside of the zone), and (v) in the event that the police officer of the zone continues to hand over his/her civil affairs.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2019.10.17 2019고정308

-수원지방법원 2014.11.03 2014고단4504

-대전지방법원 2014.10.30 2014노327

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.06.20 2019고단1442

-수원지방법원 2012.10.11 2012고정680