The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

One (No. 1) seized net value shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case on the following grounds: (a) misunderstanding of facts or misapprehending of legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

1) The Defendant’s injury resulting from special obstruction of performance of official duties was flicked by flicker’s flick, and flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker’s flicker, but did not flicker the police officer to interfere with the performance of official duties, and even if the Defendant already presented flicker’s flicker

B. The prosecutor (an unjust assertion) sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, and two years of suspended execution) is too unfased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the Defendant’s mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principle on the part of the Defendant’s injury resulting from a special obstruction of performance of official duties under Article 144(2) of the Criminal Act is a crime committed by causing the injury of the public official by assaulting or threatening the public official to show an organization or multiple power or by carrying a dangerous object. Here, assault refers to exercising force.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7412 Decided December 23, 2010). Meanwhile, in relation to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, the other party’s intent is a public official performing official duties, and assault or intimidation against this.