logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.03.30 2016고단6653
업무방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On December 19, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s mother’s business operation by force by avoiding disturbances between approximately 35 minutes, including: (a) 35 minutes of the victim’s disturbance, namely, e.g., “e., e., e., e., this weather”; and (b) e.g., repeating the victim’s disturbance to 35 minutes of entry into and departure from the Daodong-gu (Se. 52 years of age); (c) without any justifiable reason, under the influence of alcohol from the Doodong-gu operated by the victim C (FF).

2. On December 20, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, at around 00:16, who received a report on the reason under paragraph (1) on the Dondong-gu Dondong-gu Dondong-gu Dandong-gu Bag on the front of the Dondong-gu Dondong-gu Dondong-gu, and was urged by F, G, Ha, Ha, Ha, and Ha, to return home, the Defendant’s identification card and knife on the patrol vehicle, and used the Defendant’s cell phone that was knife in his hand, with the Defendant’s cell phone located in F, on the front of the Dondong-gu Dondong-gu Dondong-gu Dondong-gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of official duties by police officers regarding the handling of reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes in writing C;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act of the choice of punishment (the point of interference with business), Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with the performance of official duties), and the selection of fines (the fact that the defendant led to confession and seriously reflects the defendant, the fact that the defendant has agreed with the victim of interference with business, and the fact that the defendant is the first offender who has no record of crime).

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

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