(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.08.08 2014고단2040

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) 서울남부지방법원 2014.08.08 2014고단2040

공무집행방해

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On 22:00 on 06. 03. 06. 222:00, the Defendant, at the front of the school guarantee right located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul City City doctor, she was punished by a public prosecution for taxi driver B and franc. Around 97, the Defendant, upon receiving a report on 112, paid a taxi fee from D’s position in the Yeongdeungpo-gu Police Station C, and was urged to return home to her home and her home, used the Defendant’s francing of D as “I am back, why she will pay the taxi fee, why she will pay, why she will pay the taxi fee, and what she would be dead.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning 112 reporting handling duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol law to B and D

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines;

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

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserted to the effect that “the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder by drinking at the time of committing the instant crime.” Thus, according to the evidence of the judgment, it is acknowledged that the Defendant was in a state of drinking at the time of committing the crime, but in light of the Defendant’s behavior before and after committing the crime, it does not appear that the Defendant did not have the ability or ability to make a decision to discern things, and thus, the above assertion is rejected.

Although it is necessary to strictly punish the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties in order to prevent the danger of public authority and to create a social atmosphere that respects the law and principles, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant is making a confession of the crime of this case; (b) the Defendant is the primary offender; and (c) the degree of the assault of this case; (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., all the conditions of sentencing

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2014.11.28 2014고단3474

-서울남부지방법원 2014.08.12 2014고단2038

-서울남부지방법원 2015.11.13 2015고단4131

-서울남부지방법원 2014.09.19 2014고단2487

-서울남부지방법원 2015.07.24 2015노409