logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.05.10 2017고단500
공무집행방해
Text

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

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

Reasons

Criminal facts

On December 18, 2016, at around 01:08, the Defendant had no alcohol level of 1.30,000 won at the D musical shop located in the fifth floor of Kimhae-si C building, and had a dispute over its employees and city expenses. The Defendant heard the Defendant’s opinion to the effect that “the Defendant is a police officer, who is a public official of the E terrestrial police officer, to arrive at the scene upon receiving a report, and return home.”

Chewing strings, a man can see, a man's knife, and another knife's knife, etc., and two times through a hand, seems to have been able to see the victim's face side by drinking, and followed by a hand, a part of the victim's knife was pushed.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention and suppression of police officers' crimes, public peace and maintenance of order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The defense counsel regarding F’s assertion of the defense counsel in the police statement protocol of the instant case asserted to the effect that the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime. However, in light of the criminal background, content and method of the crime, Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, etc., which may be duly admitted and examined by the instant court, the Defendant was in a state of lacking ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence

Therefore, the above argument cannot be accepted.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 136 of the choice of punishment;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which are favorable to the Defendant, include the following: (a) the Defendant’s mistake was pened in depth; and (b) there are some circumstances to consider the motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime.

On the other hand, the obstruction of the performance of official duties not only interferes with the function of the state's legal order by nullifying the legitimate exercise of public authority.

arrow