The defendant shall be innocent.

A. Error 1) The Defendant, a H employee, committed a serious noise to the Defendant. However, although I and J did not disclose his status and generally did not recognize that the said employee was a public official in the performance of his official duties, the Defendant did not constitute a public official under the Criminal Act. 2) The Defendant merely committed a minor physical contact with J and did not commit a assault to the extent that J was beyond the floor.

Therefore, although the defendant's act does not constitute obstruction of the performance of official duties under Article 136 of the Criminal Act, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged lies in the indictment on May 20, 2014 by the Defendant as “the date of the crime, May 2, 2014.” However, according to the respective written statements of I, J, and K and the written statement by the police of the J, it is obvious that the Defendant is a clerical error of “the date of May 20, 2014,” and even if corrected as above, it seems that there is no substantial disadvantage to the Defendant’s exercise of his/her right to defense.

At around 16:20, Hrovia in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, on the first floor of Hrovia, on the ground that the civil petition is not properly handled during the process of the civil petition, it means that "I and J interfered with the legitimate performance of official duties concerning I and J's guidance for civil service and maintenance of order by assaulting the chest part of J in elbow to the bottom of the body."

(b).