logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2013.05.08 2013고정76
특수공용물건손상미수등
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is under a state that the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to cerebrovascular or neutrony disorder, etc.

1. On August 30, 2012, at least 22:04, he/she attempted to damage special public goods at the time of Jeju-si, Jeju-si, Jeju-si, Police Station D Public Security Center in D Public Security Center, which had been in front of the Jeju-si, Jeju-si, and Jeju-si, had been able to cover the entrance, and had been 2:3 times or more at the entrance of the entrance, but he/she attempted to do so without the entrance being damaged.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and place as stipulated in Paragraph (1) of this Article, laid a stone, which is a dangerous object he stored in vinyl, to E in advance, and was in line with E’s body, when he wanted to arrest the Defendant as a flagrant offender for committing the crime under Paragraph (1).

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted E and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. A damaged site and a photo;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each investigation report;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 144(1), 136(1), 143, and 141(1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 10 (2) and 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act that are legally mitigated;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the amount of a fine for a summary order shall be reduced by more than the amount of a fine for a summary order, taking into account the following: (a) the defendant was a mentally ill-minded person due to the above disability; and (b) the defendant was unable to receive proper medical treatment due to financial circumstances; and (c) the public goods were damaged due to the defendant’s act for sentencing of Article 334(

arrow