The judgment below

The obstruction of performance of official duties is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The judgment below

(2).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Prosecutor’s sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (ten months of imprisonment and one million won of fine) is too unhutiled and unfair.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles) Defendant C’s expulsion of the victimized public official C who had been in the second floor traffic section of the obstruction of the performance of official duties cannot be deemed as legitimate execution of official duties, and the Defendant’s resistance against this cannot be deemed as constituting the elements of the obstruction of the performance of official duties.

In addition, in the process of illegal assault such as plucking, plucking, etc. against public officials including C, the illegality is excluded as self-defense in order to defend it.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on self-defense, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B) On the other hand, the vehicle in violation of the Passenger Transport Service Act has a condition that the vehicle can be operated as a private taxi under Article 146-4(1) of the Automobile Transport Business Act for large passengers, so the operation is not a crime. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is premised on a legitimate performance of official duties.

In order to be lawful for the execution of official duties, the act must be within the abstract authority of the public official, and the act must also be within the authority of the public official, and an important method as an act of duty. Whether the execution of official duties of the public official belonging to the abstract authority is legitimate should be determined objectively and reasonably based on the specific situation at the time of the act.