logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.04.13 2016노1468
공무집행방해
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the facts, the Defendant’s two times as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, on the part of the injured party, did not perform official duties of drinking control against E, and the victim did not perform official duties against E. In the instant case.

Therefore, the victim does not constitute a “public official performing duties” under Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act.

In addition, the Defendant merely spits the bath by emphasizing the police to regulate one’s own land, and the Defendant’s spits the bath, which resulted in the Defendant’s instant crime on one’s part, first of all on one’s part, on the ground that the Defendant’s spits and spits the bath.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to mistake of facts or obstructing the performance of official duties, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles ) Whether the injured party was a public official performing his duties or not referring only to the case where a public official actually performs an act necessary for the performance of his duties, but also to the case where a public official works for the performance of his duties. In accordance with the nature of his duties, it is inappropriate to separate the process of performing his duties and discuss the commencement and the termination of his duties individually, and there is a substantial case to understand the process of performing duties as a series of acts comprehensively. Furthermore, even if the injured party did not perform his specific duties in reality, if the performance of duties can be deemed to be performed only on his own job, it shall also be deemed that he is performing his duties.

arrow