logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2014.09.04 2014고단747
공무집행방해등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2014. 5. 31. 23:02경 청주시 B 빌딩에 있는 C편의점에서 술에 취해 다른 손님에게 시비를 걸며 행패를 부려 위 편의점 아르바이트생의 신고를 받고 출동한 피해자 청주청남경찰서 소속 경위 D, 경위 E이 신고내용에 대하여 조사하자 6~7명의 행인이 지켜보는 가운데, 피해자 D에게 “야, 씹새끼야, 너는 뭐야 뭐 어쩌라고 좆도 힘도 없는 놈이 운동 좀 해라, 씹새끼야, 개새끼야, 좆같은 새끼들 좆도 힘도 없는 놈들이 까불지 마라”라고 큰소리로 말하고, 발로 E의 허벅지를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant insultd the victim D openly, and interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning E's reporting and withdrawal work as police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Written statements of preparation of the F;

1. Application of on-site CCTV-related statutes;

1. Relevant Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts (the point of obstructing performance of official duties and the choice of imprisonment), the choice of punishment (the point of insult and the choice of imprisonment);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six months and not more than four months;

2. The Defendant’s decision of sentence, under the influence of alcohol at a convenience store, sent to the scene and confirmed the reported details, but the police officer obstructed the function of the State by using violence against the police officer, thereby hindering the police officer’s personal reproduction and destruction of human resources; and the Defendant, on March 11, 2010, was punished by a fine of 50,000 as a crime of damaging public goods.

arrow