logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.10.15 2019고합781
특수협박등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 28, 2019, at around 9:25, the Defendant: (a) laid a house, such as a restaurant of “C” in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu, and broken off the house in front of the restaurant; and (b) laid a shoulder-out view (around 18cc in length), carried a dangerous object, indicating that the Defendant would cause harm to the body of the victim; and (c) threatened the victim with a dangerous object.

2. The Defendant injured by a special obstruction of performance of official duties, upon receipt of a report that there is a person who frightened while under the influence of alcohol at the time and place specified in Paragraph 1, and the victim F (the age of 27) who is a policeman belonging to the Incheon Gyeyang Police Station Emba, called the Incheon Gyeyang Police Station Emba in order to prevent the Defendant from committing the Defendant’s act, has served as the victim’s left knife under

As a result, the Defendant carried dangerous articles and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers, and thereby, the Defendant suffered injury, such as an open stand in the part of the lower sale which requires approximately two weeks medical treatment to F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. Investigation reports and investigation reports on D police statements (CCTV image analysis);

1. On-site photographs, photographs of crime tools, and victim police officers’ pictures, opinions, and general diagnosis documents, and the defendant and defense counsel at the department reporting the 112 Incident asserted that the defendant was in a state of mental disability by drinking sob at the time of each of the instant crimes. However, in full view of the circumstances leading up to each of the instant crimes, the method and method of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the act committed by the defendant at the time of each of the instant crimes, which can be found by the evidence duly adopted and duly examined by the court, it does not seem that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crimes, but it does not seem that the defendant had the weak ability to discern things

Therefore, this part of the defendant and defense counsel is accepted.

arrow