2013 Height 1736 Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties

A person shall be appointed.

Yellowia (Lawsuits) and Huheen (Trial)

Attorneys Kim Sang-sik (Korean National Assembly Line)

August 8, 2013

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than six months.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Probation and community service for 80 hours shall be ordered to the accused.

Punishment of the crime

1. Interference with business;

On April 17, 2013, at around 20 20: 20, the Defendant was trying to purchase the Rabs from the Victim B in Ulsan-gu, “Astrest Hashes” in the “000 Scirs of the Victim B’s Operation,” and the Defendant’s labscing labscing labs.

D. C. 20 minutes of disturbance, such as why the rackers do so, why the rackers take a large volume of "n" in accordance with the principle of funeral services, and f.b. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f. f.,

The victim's Schlage by force is unable to enter the said Schlage by preventing customers from entering it.

The operation interfered with the business affairs.

2. Performance of official duties;

The defendant was arrested in a flagrant offender under suspicion of interference with the same duty as the preceding paragraph, and was detained in the Ulsan Central Police Station Integrated Detention Room in Ulsan Metropolitan City.

Defendant on April 18, 2013: around 00: At around 00, the Defendant was serving in the custody room No. 2 of the foregoing detention room and was in the line of duty.

In order to keep the police officers belonging to the Ulsan Central Police Station from being able to control the police officers belonging to the Ulsan Central Police Station, the police officers are able to take care of the c's face by drinking c in order to prevent the police officers belonging to the Ulsan Central Police Station from being able to control them.

It interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the protection of police officers' inmates.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. B and each police protocol against C;

1. Written statements;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (Interference with Business, Selection of Imprisonment) and Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act

(2) The term of imprisonment or imprisonment;

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Punishment on Crimes of Interference with Business with Heavy Punishment)

Aggravation for concurrent crimes with punishment

1. Inclusion of days of pre-trial detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Probation and community service order;

Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act

Grounds for sentencing

In light of the circumstances and contents of the obstruction of business and the obstruction of performance of official duties, the part of the obstruction of business was agreed with the victims, and the part of the obstruction of business was committed by the victims, and thus, the execution of imprisonment is suspended. However, although the defendant alleged that he has the abluence of the sexually handicapped, the criminal punishment of the obstruction of business has reached three times due to the shock failure (two times a fine and one time a suspension of the performance of duties), and thus, the risk of recidivism is recognized to be high, so the probation and the community service order corresponding to the grace period is added to the order.

Judges Hah-sik