beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. On August 26, 2014, around 07:15, the Defendant: (a) found the instant police box in front of the instant police box located in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul; and (b) tried to punish him/her by taking a bath from the taxi engineer.
Accordingly, after confirming the contents of the taxi article E, the police officer sent the taxi article to E who returned the taxi article, “I will not see the people because I sent the taxi article. I will not see this Chewing.”
As E prevents the defendant, E was pushed together one time to stop the defendant, thereby hindering police officers from performing their legitimate duties in relation to criminal investigations.
2. Although E, a police officer, made a statement in an investigative agency and this court as to the evidence that seems to correspond to each of the facts charged in the instant case, considering the following circumstances acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, it is difficult to believe it as it is, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the facts charged in the instant case.
① Even according to the statement of E, the place of occurrence of the instant case is 2 meters away from the entrance door of the police box, and CCTV is installed above the entrance. It is difficult to readily understand that the situation at the time was not recorded by the CCTV from CCTV.
② In this court, the Defendant stated that the CCTV storage period was 2-3 months, and the Defendant had already requested the investigation agency to verify CCTV at the time when 2 months have not yet elapsed since the occurrence of the instant case, and the first time from the investigation agency to this court, the police officer continued to go to go to the police box at the time of the instant case, and argued that E was pushed off in the process of following the defect E having carried out his own scam and resisting it. Under this circumstance, it can be confirmed whether the Defendant acted to go to the police box at the time of the instant case, and this is the Defendant’s act.