공무집행방해
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: (a) Police Officers D and E arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender in the crime of insult through lawful procedures; (b) moved to the patrol vehicle to the district; and (c) in light of the circumstances at the time, the need for arrest is recognized; (d) the Defendant assaulted D as indicated in the facts charged in the instant case and obstructed legitimate performance of official duties within the patrol vehicle.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and by misapprehending the legal doctrine, acquitted the instant facts charged.
2. Determination
A. On October 12, 2013, the Defendant reported the instant facts charged to the Defendant as an insurance solicitor, and on October 21:48, 2013, the Defendant falsely reported the instant facts charged to 112 that “A child was killed.”
On October 12, 2013, at around 22:15, the Defendant: (a) arrested a flagrant offender on the back of the 21st west-gu Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station C District in front of the Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, on the ground that he was arrested in the act of insultd against security guards within the 33th 21st knife of the patrol car belonging to the Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and went between C District; (b) expressed that “Y-gu, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am.” The Defendant interfered with the police officer’s duties, such as quihing the face and part of the knife, I am, and assault the external knife.
B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that there is no other evidence to acknowledge the need to arrest the Defendant at the time, solely based on the statement of police officers D and E, through lawful procedures, was insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge the need to arrest the Defendant.
C. The burden of proving the facts charged in a 1-related criminal trial for the judgment of the trial court is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be proven by evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt of the facts charged.