beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On June 25, 2016, around 21:55, the Defendant committed assault to F, on the street in front of the D cafeteria located in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu, on the ground that the Defendant requested F to move the patrol vehicle, which was under the control of the vehicles violating parking regulations, by being called out after being reported traffic inconvenience 112, and requested F to move the patrol vehicle, which was under the control of the vehicles violating parking regulations, the Defendant took a bath to the said F, on his hand, and obstructed police officers’ legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of the report of 112 cases.
Summary of Evidence
1. Legal statement of witness G and witness F;
1. 112 Report processing lists, and E district reserve service;
1. Video CDs and suspect submission CDs [the following circumstances revealed in full view of the above evidence, i.e., ① the Defendant, despite the detention by the police officers, sent a aggressive appearance, such as taking a bath to police officers and carrying a vessel, despite the detention by the police officers, and ② the Defendant, immediately before the Defendant was arrested by F, was sent back to the police officers, and the Defendant’s remaining behaviors except the Defendant did not exercise the physical power against the police officers.
Therefore, this is presumed to be due to the Defendant’s defrying of the chest by hand. ③ At the present scene of the instant crime, in addition to Defendant’s daily activity, many people continued to observe the appearance of the police and Defendant. However, it is difficult to understand that a police officer, who is believed to have recognized that his act may be taken by a third party at any time, anywhere, at the place open by broad distribution of smartphones with a video recording function, could have been taken by a third party, even if the police officer, as alleged by the Defendant, did not interfere with the Defendant’s performance of official duties.