logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.10.06 2016노4
특수공무집행방해등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the charges of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles regarding the obstruction of performance of special duties, there was no intention of obstruction of performance of special duties, since the defendant, who was a police officer, was tried to escape from the victims, and transferred to the right direction at that time.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (basic million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant committed a crime of obstruction of performance of special duties.

Therefore, the defendant's above mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles cannot be accepted.

① While two police officers demand the Defendant to leave the vehicle from the front side of the Defendant’s driver’s seat and the front side, one police officer left the front left side of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the police officer in one name moved to the right side of the Defendant’s front left side. In a situation where another police officer in another name knife the front left side of the vehicle.

(A) The reason why the two police officers turned to the right side is because they could shock the police officers on the front left side of the vehicle, which was left directly. As a result, two police officers seem to have brought about physical threats due to the sudden exhaustion of the above vehicle.

② The Defendant asserted that the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties is not established on the ground that the Defendant was driving a vehicle for the purpose of escape, and that it was not for the purpose of threatening the police officer, and thus, should be acquitted. However, the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties is not for the purpose of establishing the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties on the ground that there was no purpose of the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties on the part of

arrow