logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
집행유예
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.6.11.선고 2015고단536 판결
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단·흉기등상해),·특수공무집행방해
Cases

2015 Highest 536 Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, a deadly weapon, etc., injured person);

Special Obstruction

Defendant

○○ (69 years, South Korea), Company Board

Prosecutor

Lee Jin-hee (Institution of Prosecution) and Kim Jong-Un (Trial)

Defense Counsel

Attorney Seo-su et al. (National Election)

Imposition of Judgment

June 11, 2015

Text

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant shall be ordered to provide community service for 80 hours.

Reasons

Criminal facts

피고인은 2014. 12. 8. 22 : 00경 33소XXXX호 YF소나타 승용차를 운전하여 울산 중 구 성안동에 있는 ' 혜원정사 ' 앞 도로를 지나가던 중 전방에서 울산중부경찰서 경비교 통과 교통안전계 소속 경장인 피해자 이○○ ( 32세 ) 이 음주단속을 하고 있는 것을 보게 되었다 .

The defendant tried to go back the above vehicle in order to escape from the above vehicle due to the fact of drinking driving. However, when another vehicle stops in the rear side, which is a dangerous object, the victim's left side left side of the vehicle was turned back while driving the above vehicle, and the victim's side left side of the vehicle was turned back to the left side of the above vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the drinking control, and at the same time, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as salt dump, tensions, etc. that require strict treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to ○○○ by the police;

1. A written statement of ○○;

1. An investigation report (in relation to the attachment of a report on the results of the outpatients and medical examinations, a report on the results of the outpatients and medical examinations, and a medical certificate);

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 3(1) and 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257(1) (a) of the Criminal Act, Articles 144(1) and 136(1) of the Criminal Act (a) of the Criminal Act (a person who interferes with the performance of official duties carrying dangerous articles)

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the punishment prescribed for the crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective injury with a deadly weapon, etc.) and special obstruction of performance of official duties, and a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective injury with a deadly weapon, etc.) with heavy punishment

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Social service order;

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

Reasons for sentencing

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Areas (Along-term Injury, Along-term Injury, Along-term Bodily Injury) No. 1 (Along-term Injury, Along-term Bodily Injury)

[Special Mitigation (Aggravation)] In the case of minor bodily injury, non-conformity of punishment/Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties

[Pronouncement of sentence] Dangerous articles, which interfere with the performance of official duties and inflict injury on the police officer who suffered damage, is not good. However, the above sentence shall be determined in consideration of various sentencing factors that are favorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc., and the records and arguments, such as the fact that the defendant is led to confession and reflectiveness, that the victim does not want punishment against the defendant, that the victim does not want such punishment, that the victim did not want such punishment, that the degree of injury to the victim was not limited, and that the defendant did not have any other criminal records other than two times of fine around 193.

Judges

Judges Lee Gyeong-won

arrow