Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio.

In the event of assault and intimidation against multiple public officials performing the same official duties, the crime of interference with the performance of multiple official duties is established according to the number of public officials performing the same official duties. In the event that the act of assault and intimidation was committed in the same opportunity at the same place, and such act of assault and intimidation is assessed as one act under the social concept, the crime of interference with the performance of multiple official duties is in an ordinary competition relationship (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3505, Jun. 25, 2009, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant was at the date and time of the judgment of the court below, at the place where the court below decided in the judgment of the court below, that “the drunk passenger does not go off from bus,” sent to the scene by the police officer C and D, who was requested by the above police officers to return home from the scene, and the act of assault and assault against the police officers in favor of the police officer, and thus, it can be recognized that the above act of assault against the police officer under Article 1 of the Criminal Act was committed.

However, the lower court deemed the Defendant’s obstruction of performing official duties against the police officers as substantive concurrent crimes and aggravated concurrent crimes. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of crimes, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. In this regard, the lower judgment was no longer maintained.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio.