logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.08.14 2019고단2191
공무집행방해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 14, 2019, at around 11:55, the Defendant received a 112 report that “A shots are used” from the police officer E and F of the Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station D police box, who called to the scene after receiving a 112 report.

The above police officers had the domicile of the Defendant to have the Defendant returned home on the road. However, without any reason, the Defendant expressed a bath to the above police officers and assaulted the Defendant at one time at his/her left side of the horse E by drinking his/her own hand.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of official duties in relation to the protective measures of police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of CCTV-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. According to Article 334 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendant's act of taking relief measures against the defendant by sending a police officer after receiving a report that the defendant's reason for sentencing under Article 334 of the provisional payment order is under the influence of alcohol and taking advantage of the fact that the defendant's act of taking relief measures against the defendant is strictly punished, and the defendant is not well aware of even though the defendant is under the period of probation, and is committing such crime, the defendant must be punished strictly. Thus, the defendant's punishment shall be determined by taking into account the fact that the defendant moves into the crime of this case in contingency and the defendant's mistake from the investigative agency

arrow