Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2014. 12. 14. 16:30경 인천 서구 C에 있는 D의 집에 찾아가 ‘나한테 가져간 돈 1,500만 원을 달라’고 요구하면서 주방에 있던 프라이팬을 들고 거실로 나와 장식장 유리를 내리쳐 깨뜨리는 등 소란을 피우던 중, 같은 날 16:49경 112신고를 받고 출동한 인천서부경찰서 E지구대 소속 F 경장이 신고내용 등을 확인한 후 피고인을 재물손괴의 현행범인으로 체포하려 하자 ‘내 물건을 내가 부쉈는데 당신들이 무슨 상관이냐, 내가 뭘 잘못했느냐, 나는 경찰서에 가지 않겠다’라고 소리치면서 발로 F 경장의 좌측 허벅지 부위를 1회 걷어차고 양손으로 수갑을 들고 있던 F 경장의 우측 손을 붙잡고 흔들었다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties such as handling 112 reports by police officers and arresting flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and D;

1. On-site damaged photographs and photographs of injury [the defendant's defense counsel is the defendant's possession, so the crime of causing property damage is not established, and therefore, it cannot be viewed as legitimate execution of official duties since there was no need to arrest a flagrant offender. Performance of official duties is premised on legitimate execution of official duties by public officials. Whether performance of official duties by public officials belonging to abstract authority is legitimate or not should be determined objectively and reasonably based on the specific circumstances at the time of the act, and should not be determined in pure objective criteria ex post facto, and the legality of arrest of flagrant offenders should be objectively determined based on the specific circumstances at the time of arrest (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do4763, Aug. 23, 2013). The place where the instant case occurred is the place of residence of the defendant, and D is the police who called the head of the instant funeral.