A. In light of the fact-finding and misapprehension of legal principles, N attempted to open the defendant's bank without presenting identification card, which is unlawful as the search and seizure of the defendant's bank was conducted prior to the arrest of the defendant in the act of committing the crime committed against the defendant, and the arrest of the defendant in the act of committing the crime based on the evidence discovered thereby is also unlawful, the evidence based on this is all inadmissible.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In full view of the purpose, details and structure of the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, etc., a police officer is a person subject to investigation under Article 3(1) of the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers (hereinafter “person subject to investigation by police officers”).

A) In determining whether a person is a person subject to questioning based on the specific circumstances at the time of the non-examination, as well as the information, expertise, etc., that should be determined based on objective and reasonable criteria. However, a police officer may not necessarily require a person subject to non-examination to be arrested or detained under the Criminal Procedure Act. In addition, in order to ask questions to a person subject to non-examination, the police officer may suspend the person subject to questioning in a reasonable manner acceptable to social norms within the minimum extent necessary for accomplishing the purpose, and investigate whether he/she carries a deadly weapon accompanied by questioning (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do6203, Sept. 13, 2012; 201Do1399, Feb. 27, 2014).