logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.11.26 2020노608
공무집행방해
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant resisted that he did not receive old age pension through mistake of facts or manipulation of documents, and there was a little fact that he raised a little expression to “EM”, and in that process, eM has been accumulated in the process of spreading it in the process of exercising the force first, such as that the “EM” gets the Defendant’s arms.

In other words, the Defendant did not commit violence to “D” by spating coffees or smuggling “D.”

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below (the fine of five million won, the suspended sentence of two years) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence, namely, ① the victimized public official D consistently testified from the investigative agency to the lower court to the lower court that the Defendant abused the victim public official in a situation at the time of the occurrence of harm, including: (a) there is no other circumstance for the victimized public official to make a false statement; (b) the Defendant had a complaint against the public official in charge of preventing the receipt of old age pension, etc.; and (c) the Defendant was deemed to have no public official in charge of EC at the time of the instant case from deeming that there was no public official in charge of EC at the time of the instant case, and the Defendant was aware of “EM” as D, the fact that the Defendant abused the victimized public official and interfered with his legitimate execution of duties, as described in the facts charged.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The lower court on the assertion of unfair sentencing seems to have sentenced the suspension of the execution of a fine, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s primary offender who has no criminal power over his age, etc.

arrow