logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.24 2016고단7646
상해등
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant was under the influence of alcohol in the B B B B in Seoul Special Metropolitan City on June 28, 2016, when he was under the influence of physical and mental disorder, cardio-cerebral cerebral cerebral typhy, marization, transition disorder, etc. on June 28, 2016, and was under the influence of alcohol at around 03:00, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol from the victim D (30 years of age) who was a policeman belonging to the Seoul Maak Police Station C of Seoul, who was dispatched after receiving a report from the 112 police officer; and

N. N. N.N.N.

During the period of the victim’s walk, “A” refers to “Abrest and unbrest, the victim was faced with the victim’s co-defluence without any reason.”

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers on the handling of 112 reported cases, and at the same time, the Defendant laid down a bridge which requires approximately three weeks of medical treatment to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E, F, D, G, and H:

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Each statement of E and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to damaged parts of photographs and diagnostic reports;

1. Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 10 (2) and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act to mitigate mental and physical weakness;

1. Fine of 5,00,000 won which is suspended for a sentence; and

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the fact that there is no different criminal history, the fact that there is no punishment for the victim, and the health status that suffers from rare diseases due to an agreement with the victim)

1. According to the above evidence and the materials revealed in the oral proceedings of this case, it is recognized that the defendant continued to receive treatment due to disease, etc. as indicated in the judgment of the court, but the victim's consistent statement can be recognized as credibility in accordance with witness's statement, the defendant's friendship and alcohol reached this case while returning home, and the defendant's person before and after the crime of this case is committed.

arrow