가. 사실오인 피고인은 공소사실 기재 일시, 장소에서 경찰관 D에게 침을 뱉은 사실이 없고, 침을 뱉으려는 의사 없이 침을 뱉는 시늉만 하였다.

B. The act of spiting spits by the defendant in misapprehension of legal principles against D is not an act of assaulting under the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties.

The act of spits or spits such as spits or spits against the defendant who has no intention to spits or spits such spits or spits is illegal act of arresting the defendant. The act of spits or spits against the provisions of the law is invalid.

C. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing sentence (4 million won of a fine) imposed by the court below is too heavy or unreasonable (the defendant).

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant cannot be deemed to have misunderstood the facts on the ground that D, a police officer, took a high-tension attitude against D and cabgs on the ground that D, a police officer, took a high-tension attitude in regulating the illegal driving of taxi drivers D, and that D, a police officer, took a bath as stated in the facts charged, can be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. Regarding the assertion of legal principles, the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties is established by assaulting or threatening a public official who performs his/her duties with respect to the assault of obstruction of the performance of official duties. The assault at this time refers to an act of exercising an unlawful tangible power against a public official, which directly or indirectly, or without intimidation, and the other party gives notice of all harm and injury that may cause fear to the other party. However, the assault or intimidation is against a public official who performs his/her duties by nature, and should be likely to interfere