The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles expressed the victim F’s desire to insult him at the time and place indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, but there was no need to arrest the defendant as a flagrant offender at the time when the police officer called out. Since it was inappropriate for the police officer to arrest the defendant as a flagrant offender because the defendant was not likely to flee or destroy evidence, the defendant’s act does not constitute the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties or as self-defense.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are premised on the lawful performance of official duties by public officials. Whether performance of official duties by public officials belonging to abstract authority is legitimate should be determined objectively and reasonably based on the specific circumstances at the time of the act, and it should not be determined ex post purely from pure objective criteria (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Do453, May 10, 1991). Likewise, the legality of arrest of flagrant offenders should be objectively determined based on the specific circumstances at the time of arrest, and should not be determined ex post facto as to whether it is recognized as an offender (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do4763, Aug. 23, 2013). Specifically, in the instant case, examining whether H’s arrest of a flagrant offender was lawful performance of official duties by public officials. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the Defendant appears to have confirmed the facts of the instant charges and reported the Defendant’s punishment to F.