The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months.

Judgment on the Grounds for Appeal

A. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles as to the injury caused by the obstruction of performance of official duties to Defendant C (whether there was injury to the victim), “injury” under Article 257 of the Criminal Act refers to the injury caused by the completeness of the victim’s body or physiological function. Annoyingly, the crime of causing the injury caused by the obstruction of official duties cannot be evaluated as “injury” under Article 257 of the Criminal Act is an upper place, and it is difficult to view that the injury caused by the crime of causing the obstruction of official duties to have infringed on health conditions due to the lack of treatment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do10305, May 26, 2011). 2) The lower court did not constitute the crime of causing the injury caused by the obstruction of official duties to Defendant C by the time following the lower court’s determination that the victim, who was the victim, had no injury caused by the obstruction of official duties, and that it did not go to the extent that it would have been recovered from the office after the next day after treatment.