” 라는 말을 듣자 화가 나 E에게 ” 씹할 놈 아, 개새끼야, 택시비 준다 ”라고 욕설을 하면서 주먹으로 E의 얼굴 부위를 1회 때리고, 발로 복부를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the situation service of police boxes.

2. Determination

A. 1) The Defendant did not look at the face of E once.

The argument is asserted.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant's and defense counsel's above assertion is not accepted, since the defendant's and defense counsel's aforementioned assertion is not accepted in the process of resisting to the police station where the defendant's defect E about to leave without paying a taxi fee is likely to bring the defendant to the police station.

2) 한편, 이 법원이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 이 사건의 전과 정을 목격한 F이 수사기관에서부터 이 법정에 이르기까지 피고인이 발로 E의 복부를 가격하였다는 진술을 하지 않은 점, 피고인이 폭력을 행사하다가 경찰관에게 제압당할 때까지의 장면이 녹화된 CCTV 영상 등에 비추어 보면, 검사가 제출한 증거만으로는 피고인이 발로 E의 복부를 1회 걷어찼음을 인정하기 부족하다.

B. If E determined that the Defendant was a person without fault at the instant site, the legality of the performance of official duties would be determined by applying the crime of fraud to a person who was committed in accordance with the urgent arrest or the procedure for the arrest of flagrant offenders, or by applying the criminal intent to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, thereby attaching the Defendant according to the procedure for the arrest of flagrant offenders.