A. In light of the evidence of this case of mistake of facts, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case although the defendant could not be found to have obstructed the performance of official duties. The judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding

B. The lower court’s sentence (three million won of fine) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s judgment was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or the first instance court’s additional examination of evidence conducted by the time of closing argument, maintaining the first instance court’s judgment as to the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is remarkably unreasonable in full view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of the first instance court’s additional examination of evidence conducted by the time of closing argument, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s judgment on the grounds that the first instance judgment on the credibility

In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of the original trial, namely, ① the witness F and G’s statement is consistent and specific, ② the witness H stated that the Defendant was flicking and flicking the police officer’s flick, but the witness H stated that the Defendant was flicking and flicking the police officer’s flicking. However, when the witness statement was made at the police station, the Defendant did not appear to have been flicked with the police officer, but again