특수공무집행방해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. (1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant had no intention to interfere with special obstruction of performance of official duties or damage to public goods while driving a vehicle into a district parking lot under the influence of alcohol at the time. As such, while driving the vehicle as a district parking lot, the Defendant did not have any intention to interfere with the performance of duties or damage public goods at the time.
(2) The Defendant was found to have driven under the influence of alcohol on the part of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving under the influence of alcohol). However, the Defendant was trying to move a short distance from the front of the district to the parking lot within the district to a safe place. As such, the Defendant did not drive a 100-meter section from the public parking lot within the H market to the D district as in the charges of this part.
(3) As to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving), the Defendant failed to obtain a separate notice that the license was revoked at the time, the Defendant did not have an intention to drive without obtaining a license.
B. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine (with regard to the obstruction of special performance of official duties), the Defendant is only a fact that he shocked the seat of the earth before the earth, and did not exercise the direct force against the police officer, such act by the Defendant cannot be deemed as an assault against the police officer.
C. In the event of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability under the influence of alcohol.
The sentence of the lower court on the assertion of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. We examine the point of special obstruction of performance of official duties and damage to public goods. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, police officers F who worked in the earth area at the time, are investigative agencies and police officers.