(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.09.20 2018노983 | 리걸엔진

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) 전주지방법원 2018.09.20 2018노983

공무집행방해등

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts (a.e., injury to E) Defendant prices the left side of the victim E by drinking, and Defendant did not agree to walk the part of the victim’s bucks.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an imprisonment of three months, a fine of ten million won) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In fact mistake (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below) on the premise that the Defendant was assigned a warrant of execution on the basis of unpaid fines in practice, on the premise that the warrant of execution is issued. Thus, in the end of the end of the hand-on order (PDA), notification of the issuance of the warrant of execution can be made regardless of whether or not the warrant of execution is inquired, and the witness C and T have consistently notified the Defendant that the warrant of execution was issued.

In the statement, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds that there are no other circumstances to suspect the credibility of the above statement.

2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the facts alleged by the Defendant.

① The victim E consistently explained the terms and conditions of the contract on the purchase of state-owned land from the investigative agency to the court of the court below. The Defendant himself, while taking a half-end and bath to Y, made an assault on 4-5 occasions to the left side of the lower court, and reported it to 112.

The defendant was unilaterally assaulted by the defendant, and the defendant did not set up against it.

“The” and specifically stated the damage situations, and the photographs taken by the police officer dispatched upon receipt of a report.

유사 판례

-창원지법 2017. 6. 15. 선고 2017노126 판결

-서울고등법원 2018.05.03 2018노64

-의정부지방법원 2017. 6. 2. 선고 2016노3504 판결

-의정부지방법원 2017.06.02 2016노3504

-전주지방법원 2018.07.05 2017노1802