logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.08.17 2016고단2627
특수공무집행방해등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 2016, the Defendant, who became aware of 30 years ago, requested the victim C (n, 48 years of age) to teach with the victim as soon as he re-satisfyed through the terator around the end of May 2016.

1. The Defendant, not refusing to leave on July 3, 2016, was under the influence of alcohol at the victim C’s house located on the second floor of the E Beauty Group D located in Young-gun, South Yong-gun on July 3, 2016, and the Defendant did not want to lead to the relationship with the Defendant, as long as the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the victim C.

in the house above, and the house above is different; and

The demand was made.

However, without complying with this, the Defendant: “I am to the end and end, I am to the end, and I am to the end if I am to the end,” and received a report on July 4, 2016 and refused to comply with the demand of the victim to leave until the police officers are dispatched.”

2. On July 4, 2016, at around 17:50, the Defendant: (a) demanded that six police officers, such as Yeongdeungpo-gu Police Station F Team G, etc., sent out upon receipt of a report as stated in paragraph (1), arrive at the site and return home; (b) however, the Defendant, at the above C’s dwelling site, took away dangerous objects (24 cm in total length and 13 cm in length) using the transition, which is a dangerous object in the said C’s dwelling; and (c) cut off the above transition to the police officer’s own title, and put it over on the front door of the week, and (d) put the police officer into the front door and throw away from gas in the front door without returning the police officer; and (e) put the head in excess of the police officer’s right to demand excessive intimidation.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers in relation to the handling of reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. G statements;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on seizure records;

1. Criminal facts;

arrow