Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, it is justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted of obstruction of the performance of official duties among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In doing so, there is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the intent in the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, the legality of arrest of flagrant offenders, self-defense, or defense by mistake.

In addition, the court's decision to adopt the application for examination of evidence may choose not to investigate it when it deems it unnecessary at the court's discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3282, Oct. 10, 2003). Thus, the court below's decision to dismiss the defendant's application for examination of evidence cannot be deemed unlawful on the ground that the court below rejected the

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.