The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. According to the statements, etc. by the police officers who suffered from mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles and the police officers of the same police officer, it is evident that the defendant expressed a desire to the police officer before obstructing the performance of duties by the police officers.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant about the insult of the defendant on the ground that it is unclear whether the defendant clearly expressed a desire for a police officer, and that the offense of insult should be included in the form of the obstruction of performance of official duties and should be judged together, is erroneous or erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

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

Judgment

A. On December 9, 2014, the Defendant, at around 23:50 on December 23:50, 2014, was under the influence of alcohol in front of the C convenience point located in the Hadodonam-gun B, and was urged to return home from E in the circumstances leading to the Hado Police Station D District, the employees of the above convenience store, and the behaviors, but without any justifiable reason, reported to the victim that he/she would return home from E in the Hado Police Station D District, and the victim’s circumstances.

A. Chewing typa to be added to pump house;

Along with ‘I ambling.', I expressed a desire several times.

2. In addition, it is unclear whether the Defendant made the above bath to the police officer clearly, and it is difficult to judge that the Defendant spits spit, which was drunk to the extent that it is impossible to express his opinion in a normal sense, were damaged or threatened with the external reputation of the police officer due to the breath, and as long as the Defendant was indicted at the time of the instant case on the charge of obstruction of the performance of official duties with regard to the fact that the Defendant spits and spits the breath of the police officer, the act of breathing the police officer while breathing him must be determined together by being included in the form of the act of obstruction of the performance of official duties, and as there is no need to rate it as an offense of insult, this part of the charges