The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The defendant of the gist of the grounds for appeal asserts that since the victim used the assault first to do so and used the assault at the time when the vehicle in this case stops, the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is not established.

2. The legal interest protected by the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is to seriously punish the drivers of vehicles in operation by force against the drivers of vehicles in operation, thereby establishing traffic order and ensuring the safety of citizens. As such, the crime of assault or assault against the drivers of vehicles in operation is one of the crimes under Article 5-10 (1) and (2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, since the crime of assault or assault against the drivers of vehicles in operation is committed in a manner that threatens the safety of drivers, passengers, pedestrians, etc., and thus, is committed in a manner that does not pose a threat to traffic safety and order of citizens

(Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4375 Decided December 11, 2008). Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant started driving a bus while the victim was a bus driver and the defendant was able to take the head of the victim at the seat of the defendant from among the roads where the driver was punished, and stopped the bus by causing interference with driving by taking the driver's hand, leading the victim's hand, leading the driver who was carrying the driver's hand, leading the driver's hand, leading the driver's hand, leading the driver's hand, leading the driver's hand, and trying to get off the bus. The defendant started driving the bus while the victim was driving the bus, and when the vehicle was temporarily stopped due to the defendant's assault (the road is not the right edge of the road, but the right edge of the road).