The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court ex officio determined that the Defendant’s act of inflicting an injury upon the victim, who caused the execution of an execution office, constitutes a crime of obstructing the performance of official duties. In order to establish a crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, the subject of assault or intimidation should be “public official.”
According to the police statement report on E as to whether E is a public official, E is recognized as the fact that it is D with the Gangnam District Court of Chuncheon.
Article 21 (Employment, etc. of clerical Staff) (1) The office of enforcement officers may have clerical staff (including staff in charge of accounting) to assist the affairs of enforcement officers.
(2) The clerical staff shall have qualifications equivalent to or higher than those of Grade IX or higher at courts and prosecutors' offices.
The representative executive officer shall be employed with the permission of the head of the affiliated method center from among recognized persons.
In light of the nature of the work of a clerical staff, a clerical staff of an execution officer’s office may not be deemed a public official who is the object of obstructing the performance of official duties (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14394, Mar. 10, 201). Therefore, among the facts charged in the instant case, the part of obstructing the performance of official duties among the facts charged in the instant case ought to be acquitted when there is no proof of
However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by misunderstanding the facts.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below shall be pronounced not guilty on the charge of obstructing the performance of official duties among the facts charged in this case, and the court below recognized the guilty of all the facts charged as guilty and rendered a single sentence in view of the ordinary concurrent crimes. Thus, without examining the defendant's unfair judgment on the sentencing, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in its entirety pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it shall be
[Judgment to be used again] A crime history.