The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the case of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, Defendant 1 did not know the fact that the police officers would stop their paths and control drinking due to influence of drinking and stroke at the time of the instant case. The Defendant’s act does not constitute a crime of obstruction of performance of special duties because there was no intention that the police officers would interfere with the execution of official duties by changing the vehicle stopped on the first lane to the second lane, and again changed the vehicle again to the second lane to avoid this. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine. 2) In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that found the Defendant guilty of the obstruction of special official duties.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below. ① The Defendant admitted this part of the facts charged on the first day of the court below on the trial of the court below, and there is no special circumstance to suspect the credibility of the Defendant’s confession. ② At the time of the instant case, the victimized police officers installed a car and contact with the driver at the first and second lanes in order to control drinking, and parked in light with light light, and the driver might have easily known the fact that the above drinking control was passed through the above drinking control. ③ The Defendant, despite the change of the vehicle to the second lane, left the container installed on the road again by changing the one lane despite the police officers’ stop signal, and thereafter, the Defendant escaped.