logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.02.21 2017고단3456
모욕등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 22, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment by the Changwon District Court for interference with the execution of official duties, etc., and on July 1, 2015, the execution of the sentence was completed in Busan Correctional Institution.

1. In around 15:30 on May 27, 2017, the Defendant’s insultd the victim by openly insulting the victim, “In a situation where F, who is an employee of the above convenience store, takes advantage of the victim E (24 tax) who is an employee of the said convenience store, and is the head of F, who is a convenience store, the user of the non-convenition store, the building building of the son’s son, and the son who is a bit of bitch bit of a bitch bit of a bitch.”

2. On May 27, 2017, from around 15:30 to 16:00, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s convenience store business by force by allowing customers to enter the convenience store by failing to walk around the convenience store run by the victim F as described in the said paragraph (1), or by causing customers in the convenience store to get out of the convenience store.

3. The Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties at the time and place as indicated in the above paragraph (2), and at the Busan Central District Police Station G District Habridge H, Busan Central Police Station G District H, which was dispatched upon receipt of a report by 112, expressed that “it is not the same bit of bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch,” and assaulted the police son, who was carried by the police officer in his hand, by fringing the chest of the above police officer, with his son’s bitch, fring the victim’s chest, with his son’s hand, and with his hand.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning the handling of 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to E, F, and H;

1. Complaint;

1. Previous convictions: Application of an inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and an investigation report (prior convictions and confirmations of repeated crimes)-related statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 311, 314 (1), and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The grounds for sentencing of Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act for the aggravation of concurrent crimes.

arrow