logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.06.03 2012고단6866
재물손괴등
Text

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 19, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment by the Incheon District Court due to property damage, etc., and completed the execution of the sentence in the Incheon Detention House on June 3, 2012.

1. On December 4, 2012, at around 19:25, the Defendant: (a) caused damage to property, at a store operated by the victim D (here, 84 years of age) in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul; (b) caused the victim to drinking the smoke of the crogate installed at that place; and (c) caused the damage to its utility by breaking the smoke of the crogate in an amount equivalent to KRW 60,000 in the market price.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and at the same place of the obstruction of performance of official duties, committed violence, such as: (a) the defect that the case was sent to the E District District of the Sejong Cancer Police Station by destroying and damaging property as referred to in the preceding paragraph; and (b) the F expressed that “I am out of the prison. I am fright if I amboms, I am slebling the fat, I am slebling the fat; and (c) walking the f’s bridge.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the investigation of a police officer's case.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous offense: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal investigation reports (preliminary offense and report on confirmation);

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Articles 136 (1) and 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime. In light of all the circumstances, such as the motive for committing the crime, the content of the crime, and the Defendant’s speech and behavior before and after the crime, it is recognized that the Defendant was in a state of drinking at the time of committing the crime.

arrow