공무집행방해등
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
The court below found the defendant guilty on July 23, 2015 of the facts charged in the instant case, and found the defendant guilty on the obstruction of the performance of official duties.
Accordingly, the defendant appealed against the guilty portion on the grounds of mistake of facts and illegality of sentencing, and the prosecutor appealed against the acquittal portion on the grounds of mistake of facts and illegality of sentencing.
Before remand, the trial before remand does not clarify the official duties of the police officer who infringed on the defendant, and there was a procedure to arrest the police officer in the act of committing the crime alleged by the prosecutor, or it is difficult to view that the official duties of the police officer are legitimate. In such a situation, the defendant committed assault against F to escape from F of the police officer who put the defendant on his own
On the ground that the defendant cannot be deemed to have interfered with the performance of official duties, the part of the judgment of the court below reversed and acquitted the defendant, and the prosecutor's appeal against the part of the judgment of the court below dismissed.
Accordingly, the prosecutor appealed on the ground of the violation of the rules of evidence and the misunderstanding of legal principles.
The Supreme Court held that the court below’s process of arresting the defendant as an offender in the crime of insult can not be seen as legitimate execution of official duties against the defendant. The court below erred by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, by misapprehending the legal principles on arrest of a flagrant offender, obstruction of performance of official duties, and defense
In determining the judgment of the court below, the part of the judgment below concerning interference with the performance of official duties is reversed and remanded, and the prosecutor's appeal was dismissed.
The scope of this Court's adjudication is divided and finalized as the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed. Thus, the scope of this Court's adjudication is among the judgment below.