logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.04.14 2017노105
공무집행방해
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (7 million won in penalty) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the mistake in depth; (b) there was no past history of criminal punishment; and (c) the victims do not want the punishment of the Defendant by mutual consent with the victims.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by two police officers dispatched after receiving 112 reports under the influence of alcohol by assaulting two police officers so that they interfere with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers, and at the same time, causing injuries to the victimized police officers. One of the victimized police officers suffered injuries, such as diversification of dives that require treatment for about six weeks, and there is a need to strictly punish the crime that interferes with the execution of official duties in order to establish the state's legal order and eradicate the light of public power. In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the crime of this case, the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., and other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, the prosecutor's assertion has merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

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 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

arrow