logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2017.04.28 2017고단169
공무집행방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 8,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On December 20, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force by avoiding disturbance for about 20 minutes, such as 20 minutes of the disturbance, i.e., the victim D, who was the owner of the business, discovered, shaking, and debrising the boom, while drunking in the cafeteria B, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by avoiding disturbance for about 20 minutes; and (b) interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force.

2. 공무집행 방해 피고인은 제 1 항 기재 일시장소에서 위와 같이 행패를 부리던 중 112 신고를 받고 출동한 F 지구대 소속 경찰관 경사 G이 피고인에게 " 술을 많이 먹었으니 술값을 지급하고 귀가 하라, 집이 어 딘지 말하면 데려다주겠다" 고 말하자 " 야 이 씨 발 새끼야" 라고 욕설을 하며 위 G의 가슴을 오른손으로 툭툭 2회 치는 등 폭행하고, 계속하여 발로 G의 왼쪽 정강이를 1회 걷어찼다.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the handling of 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made in relation to G or D;

1. Application of the C CCTV image photograph Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 316(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of public duties), and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the said Act (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes against a person who interferes with heavier business affairs);

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the order of provisional payment is deemed to obstruct another person’s business without any reason and assault a police officer performing his/her duties, and the case is minor. However, the defendant is in depth against the crime, and the victim D does not want the punishment of the defendant, and the victim G does not want the victim’s assault.

arrow