2013 Highest 3855 Injury, obstruction of performance of official duties, and violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving)

A

National business administration, type of prosecution, and trial;

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

April 25, 2014

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Criminal History Office

1. Violation of the Road Traffic Act;

On August 8, 2013, 13. 22:40, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with 0.126% of blood alcohol concentration, and the Defendant was driving the E business car from around 6km to the Daejeon Seo-gu Mad'D in Daejeon Seo-gu C.

2. Performance of official duties or injury;

On August 13, 2013, at around 22:45, the Defendant discovered from five police officers such as GH, etc. in the background of the F of the Daejeon Police Station GH, which was posted in front of the D cafeteria, to run away to the D cafeteria, and the Defendant called "a si si si si si."

The Defendant tried to flee to the victim H (the age of 34) after putting the victim H (the age of 34) her desire to “h,” and she saw the victim H’s chest part of the victim H’s chest, she satisfe by satisfing him/herself and satisfing him/her once, and she saw the victim H’s chest part of his/her chest part of the victim H by putting the police uniform over the victim H, thereby damaging the victim H beyond the floor for a week.

The Defendant continued to restrain the Victim G (the 48-year-old age) from exercising one week’s right to care by walking 2 to 3 times, and led the victim G not to undergo one week’s treatment. Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with police officers’ legitimate performance of their official duties on drinking control, and at the same time inflicted injury on the victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness H.G.I.J.

1. An investigation report (a report accompanied by a victim GH diagnosis report);

1. Inquiries, reply reports, and photographs; and

1. The history of modification, deletion, and cancellation of a master dosimeter;

1. The ledger of records of checking the results of crackdown on drinking driving (17-2 amended and evidence list);

1. Control note;

Judgment on Defendant’s argument

First, the defendant asserts that there is no notification of the right to appoint counsel when arresting a flagrant offender (Article 200-5 of the Criminal Procedure Act) and all of the evidence collected in the investigation process is illegal.

According to each evidence of the judgment, the Defendant, at around 22:50 on August 13, 2013, notified the police officer’s HG’s legality of performing official duties concerning the control of police officers’ drinking, etc. at the time of arrest of a flagrant offender due to the obstruction of performance of official duties against slope H in front of a D restaurant, etc.

Next, the defendant asserts to the effect that the result of the drinking alcohol measurement conducted without standing to be able to be used as evidence cannot be used as evidence.

Comprehensively taking into account the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the following circumstances based on the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant rejected it three times even though the police officer had given an opportunity to her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her hers her her her her

(2) From the time when the defendant first crackdowns on a drinking-free machine, at least 16 minutes have passed since the time when the defendant breath measurement was conducted in K District as a respiratory tester.

③ The Defendant made a statement at an investigative agency that he/she drank one-six-six-six-six-six-four percent of a solitary beverage and three-four-four percent of a solitary beverage in the court.

④ The Defendant’s drinking deposit manager’s blood alcohol concentration of 0.126% significantly exceeds 0.1%, which is the standard for punishing the numerical value. At the time the Defendant’s report on the circumstantial statement of his driver was discovered, the Defendant’s speech and behavior state: A large amount of smelling in his/her mouth, ropical snow, walking condition, ordinary, and driver’s blood color: red letter.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 257 (1) of each Criminal Code (influence of injury), Article 136 (1) of each Criminal Code (influence of the performance of official duties), Article 148-2 (2) 2 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (influence of drinking driving)

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of each Criminal Act (Punishments stipulated in each of the crimes of bodily injury against G and the crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties, the crimes of bodily injury against victim H, the crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties, and the crimes of bodily injury against victims of heavy punishment)

1. Selection of punishment;

Each Imprisonment Selection

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act / [the scope of recommendations] / [the scope of recommendations] violent crime group, general injury (type 1), basic area, 4 months to 1 year and 6 months [the application of guidelines for multiple crimes] imprisonment from 6 months to 2 months.

[Determination of Sentence] Ten months of imprisonment

○ Unfavorable Conditions

· The intent of victims to punish the victims that there is no effort to recover from poor damage caused by the crime, such as the method and manner of the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties

· High drinking water, driving distance is reasonable

· The defendant's speech and behavior in the course of the investigation and public trial is not seriously contradictory;

○ favorable normal and primary crimes, contingent crimes (excluding sound driving), and minor details of injury

Judge Choi Dooe-forest