(b) Damage to property;

(c) Contempt;

(d) Performance of official duties;

1. The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is premised on a legitimate performance of official duties by a public official.

whether a public official’s performance of his duties is legitimate or not shall be based on the specific circumstances at the time of the

such determination in an objective and reasonable manner and after the determination in pure objective criteria

No person shall be held (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do4763, Aug. 23, 2013).

Any person may arrest a flagrant offender who is committing or immediately after committing a crime without a warrant.

(Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Act). In order to arrest a flagrant offender, the punishment of the act, the present nature and time of the crime.

The necessity of arrest, i.e., the necessity of escape or destruction of evidence, in addition to the enemy's identity, the apparentness of the offense.

to the extent that such requirements for the arrest of a flagrant offender are satisfied are satisfied at the time of the arrest.

It should be judged as the beginning, and there is a room for considerable discretion in the judgment of the investigative body.

under the circumstances at the time of arrest, the determination by the investigating authority on the requirement is in light of the empirical rule.

Illegal arrest of a flagrant offender by the investigative body unless it is deemed that there is a substantial rationality;

No determination shall be made as to whether it is reasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do13726, Feb. 18, 2016).

In addition, the police officer's arrest circumstances, such as the place and time of arrest and the reasons for arrest, and the status of the police officer's arrest;

Even if there is a somewhat different difference between arrest and criminal facts, such difference shall be the arrest unit.

The crime of a wounded series of defendants is due to the location and time close to that of the defendant.

If it is merely a degree of not impairing the spatial and temporal identity, it shall be in accordance with logical and empirical rule.

The police officer's act of arresting a flagrant offender can not be deemed to be an unlawful performance of official duties for the reason that such act was committed.

To the extent that the identity of the act of crime is maintained, the name of the crime can be changed for a long time after the arrest.

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the reason for arrest is limited by the name of the crime (Supreme Court Decision 2006 September 28, 2006).

Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do6461 and Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3640 Decided October 9, 2008, etc.

2. The lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender committing insult.

the police officer by assaulting the police officer to refuse to carry on the patrol vehicle;

In this part of the charges that interfere with the legitimate execution of duties with respect to the arrest of flagrant offenders.

(1) The Defendant’s insult crime is temporary or contingent in the course of protesting against the police officer’s act of restraint.

(2) the defendant is not likely to flee or destroy evidence.

The reason why the defendant should be immediately arrested is that the defendant was not carried with a deadly weapon.

It is difficult to see that there was a method of compulsory investigation, and it was possible to control the defendant without using the method of compulsory investigation.

(3) The act of arresting the defendant is lawful because it does not meet the requirements for arrest of a flagrant offender.

in the process of responding to the defendant's attempt to escape from the arrest.

Even if assaulted, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties was not established.

3. However, the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted are as follows.

section 23(3) of this title.

A. On September 30, 2015, the Defendant: (a) on September 30, 2015, at the main point located in Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, the Defendant was a friendly victim.

The number of days of treatment in which the victim F and alcohol can be discharged from the victim F's head in an influorous material; two

In addition, beer, beer, beer, beer, beer, beer, beer, etc. were laid on the floor and damaged. The owner of the above main shop is the owner of the above main shop.

A victim C is deemed to flow out from the head of the victim F, and there is an assault case in 112.

was reported.

B. The six police officers arrive at the above main points of the same day on the same day, and the victim F at the time.

I was asked to the head and face, and he was milched to the skin and down to the bar, and boxed to the bar.

The defendant's clothes had been put in place in a considerable amount. Damage to the defendant was inflicted on the defendant.

JF was under the influence of alcohol to a considerable extent.

(c) The defendant's bath when the slopeH asks the victim F of damage, etc. to ask the victim F;

The defendant, and the victim F, was involved in the conduct to attack the victim F, and the assistant H was the defendant.

Even though the two arms are used to control, the defendant continued to engage in the behavior to wait for the victim F.

D. The necessity of the Defendant that the slope H gets both arms of the Defendant and continuously mash the Defendant as above

The Gu and the defendant shall hear his hand and her hand, and the defendant shall take a bath to the slope H with a large interest, and shall keep his body sealed.

At around 00:27 of the same day, the defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender in the crime of insult.

(e) Subsequent to the police officers: The defendant's defect intending to board the defendant on the patrol boat;

른발로 경사 H의 목을 걷어차고, 순경 L의 코 부위를 걷어찼다.

F. The police investigated the Victim C at around 01:20 on the same day, and the emergency room for the Victim F.

After receiving the treatment, 02:25 investigation was conducted on the same day, and in the process, the defendant and the victim F.

It became known that there is a gap between punishment and punishment.

G. The defendant’s written arrest of a flagrant offender against the defendant is able to take a bath against a slope H as above.

The purport of having arrested a flagrant offender as to the facts constituting the insulting offense and the offense of insult.

In addition, two male persons are sealed on the grounds of criminal facts and arrest.

the victim F, the victim F, the victim's head, the victim, and the victim's staff at the scene of the dispatch after receiving the report;

H in a state that the defendant is going to avoid, and that the defendant is trying to be crypted to the victim F.

As the defendant was removed, the background of insulting the defendant's abusive speech, etc. is written.

4. Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the following is determined.

A. Although the name of the crime is indicated in the arrest of a flagrant offender only, a report of assault as above is written.

Defendant’s continuous violence attempted and attempted with regard to the circumstances of dispatch, state of victim F, Defendant’s continuous violence;

The circumstances leading to the intended act are specified in detail, and such entry is a crime of injury or injury; or

Since it may constitute a crime of assault, the name of the crime is limited to the reasons for arrest.

It is difficult to see it.

(b) In addition, the accused before the police officers arrive at the site and grasp personal information and the situation;

In order to take a bath to the victim F and to continue assault, police officers have prevented him/her from committing such assault.

Since a senior person was arrested as a flagrant offender, the identity of the defendant at that time is confirmed.

A. The fact that the victim F is a friendly child of the defendant, etc. is conducted after the fact.

Since it was revealed in the process, the defendant was able to flee or destroy evidence in such circumstance.

may not be said to have been likely to cause any concern.

C. When police officers arrest the defendant in the act of committing an offense, the victim F will face the victim F from his head;

Not only face, but also on and below, milched with skin and flown considerable volume to the main floor;

In such a situation, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and took a bath to the victim F.

An insulting act is conducted by making a h’ who has continued his or her behavior to be reasonable and has prevented him or her from committing a abusive act.

Therefore, the defendant's act is so minor that it is not necessary to arrest the defendant.

It shall not be deemed urgent.

D. Therefore, in light of the aforementioned objective situation at the time of arrest, police officers are the defendants.

B The measure of arresting a flagrant offender as a flagrant offender shall not be deemed to have significantly lost rationality in light of the empirical rule.

Therefore, it constitutes legitimate performance of official duties, and the defendant assaults police officers in the process.

It is reasonable to recognize that the obstruction of performance of official duties constitutes crimes.

5. Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to arrest of flagrant offenders against the defendant.

Recognizing that it was illegal because it did not meet the requirements, the defendant's breadth

Even if conducted, it was judged that the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is not established.

The judgment below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the requirements for arrest of flagrant offender or the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties.

An error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The ground of appeal assigning this error is with merit.

(c)

Accordingly, among the judgment below, the obstruction of performance of official duties shall be reversed, and the prosecutor shall render the judgment below.

All appeals against the obstruction of the performance of official duties, and each offense found guilty by the court below.

Since the judgment below should be sentenced to a single punishment in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, the judgment below is justified.

must be entirely reversed.

6. Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed and the case shall be tried and judged again by the court below.

The case is remanded to the lower court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim In-bok, Counsel for the defendant

Justices Kim Jae-han

Justices Lee Dong-won