The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows.

At around 01:40 on October 8, 2013, the Defendant, in collusion with B, set a car at the end of the wall of the 7516th major outer wall of the 7516th unit located in the north riri, and moved from B to the ward in the direction of the ward, and the Defendant was on the roof of the ward.

As a result, it was required that D soldiers who were on duty at the time of the sick and wounded in the sick and wounded soldiers should hear the explosion of heavy coal, misleads them to report to the upper part, and have an attitude of alert such as five-minute battles in the military unit and a mobilization of information analysis group.

Accordingly, in collusion with B, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties in the military unit by deceptive means.

2. The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the following grounds.

(1) The Defendant’s act of projecting a large amount of bomb toward the sick and wounded soldiers was an attack against the duty of the patrol soldier to observe the military unit, and there was an actual situation to cope with the boundary soldier, i.e., an attack, and as long as such an actual situation occurred, the boundary soldier failed to accurately grasp the emergency or scale of the situation.

Even if the security soldier was aware of the occurrence of an emergency situation, the security soldier was aware of or dismissed.

As such, there was a deceptive scheme.

subsection (b) of this section.

(2) Although the instant case does not constitute a serious issue as much as the five-minute combat team assistance or information analysis assistance is to be called out, it is natural for military officials serving in a military unit to grasp and cope with the degree of an emergency situation, and therefore, search at the scene of the Defendant’s act is conducted and the service of the soldiers was strengthened.

(2) A public official has caused the public official to do a wrong act or disposition;

shall not be deemed to exist.

3. However, it is difficult to accept the above determination by the lower court.

(1) by deceptive means.