beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Error of facts (the point of obstruction of performance of official duties) does not show any misunderstanding of facts that the Defendant shouldered the I arms of police officers.
B. The Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense of unlawful performance of official duties, which does not meet the requirements for the arrest of flagrant offenders.
C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the fine of KRW 3,00,000) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., ① the police officer I who was assaulted by the Defendant from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court to the court of the lower court; ② the Defendant did not have any standing on the part of I’s arms, and thus, it is reasonable to view that there is no reason to conclude that the Defendant was subject to such assault in addition to other assaults, even though the Defendant did not have a string of his arms from the standpoint of I. As such, the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that I’s arms as stated in the crime No. 2 of the lower judgment.
B. According to Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the assertion of misunderstanding legal principles, any person may arrest a flagrant offender without a warrant. In order to arrest a flagrant offender, the necessity of arrest, i.e., the necessity of escape or destruction of evidence, in addition to the punishment of the act, the current nature of the crime, and the apparentness of the crime.
(See Supreme Court Decision 98Do3029 delivered on January 26, 199, etc.). However, whether a person satisfies the requirements for the arrest of a flagrant offender shall be determined based on the situation at the time of the arrest, and the judgment of the investigating entity in relation thereto shall be deemed to have a reasonable discretion, and even when considering the situation at the time of arrest as the situation at the time of arrest, a flagrant offender shall be deemed to have considerable discretion.