(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.10.15 2013고단1269

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.10.15 2013고단1269

공무집행방해등

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 21, 2013, at around 23:30 Gangdong-gu, the Defendant, on the front side of Gangdong-gu, sent to the site after receiving a report of 112 that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, and on the ground that E, a policeman affiliated with D of the 3-dong Group D of Seoul Provincial Police Agency, who was dispatched to the site, prevented the Defendant from committing the Defendant’s act, assaulted the Defendant at one time by taking the left face part of E by drinking the Defendant’s hand.

The Defendant continued to arrest the Defendant as a flagrant offender committing the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, and expressed the Defendant’s desire to “A” to “A” while carrying the Defendant onto the patrol vehicle and carrying the Defendant to the F district of the Gangseo Police Station, and assault the Defendant on one occasion with his face face.

As such, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers concerning the prevention and suppression of crimes and the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report and report on the use of police gear;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 136 (1) of the Selection of Punishment;

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

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted as to the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act at the time of the instant crime. However, in light of the circumstances before and after the instant crime, circumstances leading up to the instant crime, circumstances leading up to the instant crime, Defendant’s behavior, etc., the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things at the time of the instant crime.

It does not seem that it has reached a state of or weakness, and further, in light of the defendant's power, ordinary drinking behavior, drinking circumstances at the time of the instant case, etc., the defendant sufficiently predicted the occurrence of danger and the state of taking it into consideration.

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2013.06.18 2013고단1028

-서울동부지방법원 2013.05.23 2013고단850

-서울동부지방법원 2014.02.11 2013고단2289

-서울동부지방법원 2013.09.10 2013고단1892

-서울동부지방법원 2013.04.25 2013고단516