logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.10 2016고단393
공무집행방해
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 10, 2015, around 20:40, the Defendant received a report from the Defendant’s wife F in front of Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E Apartment No. 101 Dong 504, and received a report from the Defendant’s wife F, and sent to H and I, the police officer of the Dongjak Police Station G District called out.

“Absing the Defendant’s feet, booming the Defendant’s feet, and Ha’s feet the Defendant’s feet, and Ha’s feet the Defendant’s feet was 2-3 feet, thereby interfering with the Defendant’s feet, which was the police officer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness H and I;

1. Investigation report (to hear statements by suspect telephone);

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 136 of the choice of punishment;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which are confined in a workhouse

1. At the time of the instant case, police officers, without permission of the Defendant, tried to arrest the Defendant when the Defendant refused the request. In the course of the Defendant’s resistance to illegal official duties concerning voluntary accompanying, police officers and vagabonds do not meet the requirements of obstructing official duties or constitute legitimate defense.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of each judgment, etc., it is difficult to view the police officer’s performance of official duties such as arrest of a flagrant offender against the defendant, and thus, the above assertion by the defendant and the defense counsel based on such premise is rejected.

① At the time police officers were dispatched to the Defendant’s residence after receiving a report of F, which is the wife of the Defendant, the Defendant himself opened a written request for opening the door to the police officers.

2. The residence of the defendant at that time.

arrow