The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles, the police officer first expressed the defendant's desire to do so, and pushed the chest, and the defendant cannot use violence against the police officer, such as what is written in the facts charged, in a defensive vehicle.

Rather, the police in the defendant's port has a great damage by making excessive response, such as taking the defendant immediately lock.

B. In consideration of the various circumstances of unreasonable sentencing, the sentence of the lower court (fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the prosecutor examined the defendant's grounds for appeal, and the prosecutor applied for changes in indictment to the effect that "reasonable performance of official duties concerning the arrest of police officers in the act of committing the crime and the investigation into crimes" in the facts charged is "reasonable performance of official duties concerning the investigation of crimes by police officers", and since this court permitted it, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, after changing the defendant's mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to the facts charged, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to determination. Thus, in order to be arrested and investigated in the act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an act of violence, etc., the defendant's defect intending to go out of the counter and the situation E belonging to the Gwanak Police Station is prevented, etc., as stated in the facts charged, the defendant takes a desire as stated in the facts charged, and the police officers such as the above E have taken the face of the above E in drinking, and it is recognized that the above E et al. put the defendant's arms and sold, and the above facts charged of this case are sufficiently and sufficiently convicted.

Therefore, the decision of the court below that made the conclusion is justified, and it is so argued by the defendant.