logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.06.27 2018고단1531
공무집행방해
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

【The Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence due to a special injury, etc. at the Seoul Western District Court on May 20, 2016, and was sentenced to a four-year suspended sentence on October 28, 2016, which became final and conclusive on October 28, 2016.

[Criminal Facts]

1. On May 6, 2018, at C, located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul around 23:30 on May 6, 2018, the Defendant: (a) reported 112 on the front side of the C, and demanded the Defendant to verify the status of the victim E, a police box affiliated with the Seodaemun-gu Police Station D police station, who was called up after receiving a report of 112 that “I are frighting for men and women; and (b) called “I am fright, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am off, I am the above victim’s left face; (b) I am the victim’s frighten with his left hand, and (c) I am back the victim’s knee kne with assaulting the victim’s fright face one time, and assault the victim’s left side.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the suppression and investigation of police officers' crimes.

2. Around 02:05 on May 7, 2018, the Defendant threatened the victim on the ground that, at the office of the Seodaemun Police Station F office located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, the unification of Seodaemun-gu, the Defendant was waiting to undergo an investigation on charges of interference, etc. with the performance of official duties, etc., and that, at the time of the investigation, the Defendant neglected the Defendant’s demand that the victim Gs in light of the police station F, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, would be able to undergo a prompt investigation, and that the Defendant would be able to undergo a prompt investigation, and that the Defendant would be able to “the Defendant’s criminal conviction.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties by police officers on criminal investigations.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. H. H.

arrow