A. In regard to the crime of assault, the court below found the defendant guilty of the crime of assault even though the defendant did not assault the victim's head debt by hand, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. With regard to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, police officers F attempted to hear only the victim's speech without hearing the defendant's explanation, and such F's act cannot be seen as a legitimate performance of official duties, and thus passive resistance was made in the process of resisting the arrest. Thus, the defendant's act constitutes legitimate act or self-defense, but the judgment of the court below convicting the defendant of the crime of obstruction of official duties, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the crime of assault, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the facts of assault by taking the victim DNA head debt by hand as stated in paragraph 1 of the crime in the judgment below.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

1) The victim D consistently stated, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, that “the defendant was placed in his/her head by placing his/her hand on his/her own window during a dispute between three defendants' daily administration and the taxi engineer,” and that he/she used his/her mother and child among three defendants' daily administration (the person who used his/her mother and child during the defendant's daily administration was only the defendant at the time).

2) Gdo, which is a taxi engineer, has consistently made a statement from Gdo investigative agency to the court of original trial, and two persons, including the defendant, have been a taxi among three defendants' daily behaviors and the son's disputes, and one of them is going out into the window.