logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.12.15 2020고단1850
공무집행방해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 26, 2020, at around 20:35, the Defendant received a report from 112 stating that “I am d't know about any fluorly performed fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluorous fluor,” who was called “I fluorous fluord fluord D” on the front of Cheongju-gu, Cheongju-gu B, and asked the victim to return home from Cluor D.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties by police officers on the handling of 112 reported case.

Summary of Evidence

1. Other closure photographs of the criminal defendant's written statement concerning D's partial statement at the time of the crime;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the defendant did not use violence against the victimized police officer in determining the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

In addition, the statement of the victimized police officer is not only specific, but also the image of each photograph taken at the time is also consistent with the statement of the victimized police officer, and thus the statement of the victimized police officer can be reliable. In addition to the situation and state of the defendant's taking into custody at the time of the dispatch of the victimized police officer, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant used the violence against the victimized police officer.

Therefore, the defendant and his defense counsel cannot be accepted.

arrow