logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2018.08.22 2018고단592
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 April 6, 2018, the Defendant was drunk from the C drinking house floor located in Gumi-si B around 03:45 on April 6, 2018, and received a report of 112 that “the guest is cruel,” and went out of the above drinking house, upon receiving a supplementary axis E belonging to the Gumi-si Police Station D police box called.

While the Defendant was urged to return home from the above slope E in front of the foregoing alcohol house, he was under the influence of alcohol and her bath to the police officer, and her walked to the 119 first-aid vehicle where he was waiting to the 119 first-aid vehicle where her waiting to the said slope E, without good cause.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to E and F;

1. Application of the 112 Reporting List, the Act and subordinate statutes governing the place of service;

1. Article 136 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act of the order of provisional payment is that the police officer’s desire to return to the Defendant himself/herself for his/her safe returning to the Republic of Korea is subject to punishment. However, the punishment was imposed in consideration of the following: (a) the police officer was in a state of drinking; (b) the police officer was not directly paid the price; (c) the police officer was in the instant case; (d) the police officer was overpaid; and (e) the police officer was in contravention of the police officer’s intention; and (e) the first offender

arrow