logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.05.14 2014고단4727
업무방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Under the influence of alcohol while the Defendant suffered from mental fissiona or fred personality disorder, the Defendant lacks the ability or decision-making ability to discern things,

1. On September 2, 2014, around 10:30 on September 2, 2014, 2014, the victim called the "D mountain father and the victim E (year 51) in front of the 'D mountain father and the victim E (year 51)', demanded the victim to go to the Austria military base, and the victim was asked to go to the Austria military base even though he did not have the military base in the Austria and did not go to the Austria military base.

The Defendant: (a) provided the defective victim with an desire to give the cab in front of the G in Osan City to guide another vehicle because the victim was aware of the military base in Osan-si; and (b) provided the victim with the defective victim, such as "Chewing strings", and the string off the taxi door several times, so that the victim could not get the victim on board other customers.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's taxi business by force.

2. The date, time, and place specified in Paragraph 1 of the Property Damage and Damage Claim, as mentioned above, the victim’s disturbance was destroyed by the damage of the F vehicle’s front wind, the market value of which is approximately KRW 20,000,000 of the victim’s market value by hand.

3. On September 2, 2014, around 11:00 of the obstruction of the performance of official duties, at Osan City, he assaulted the above I’s left side side of the said I at one time on September 2, 2014, by taking advantage of his desire, such as “a sprinker off, off, and sprinke,” without any reasons as to whether I will be a son.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the maintenance of police officers' order.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to E and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on damaged damage photographs and flag photographs;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (a) and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

arrow