A. The Defendant was merely resisting the police officer for a long time on the earth, and merely resisting the police officer. As such, the Defendant did not intend to interfere with the police officer’s performance of duties.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is the fact that the other party is a public official who performs his/her duties, and the fact that he/she assaults or threatens the other party to it. The perception of it is uncertain but does not require so-called negligence, and it does not require any intent to interfere with the execution of his/her duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do11381, May 24, 2012).

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. It is reasonable to respect the allegation of unfair sentencing in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, it is compared with the lower court’s judgment on the following grounds: (a) the submission of new sentencing data was not made in the appellate court; and (b) the submission of new sentencing