The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant’s act of cutting off the FF by a police officer constitutes an assault, and the Defendant’s act interfered with the lawful execution of duties relating to the maintenance of order.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The court below found facts based on the evidence of the judgment, and found the following circumstances revealed by the facts of the judgment, namely, ① the police of this case received a report from the defendant to damage property within the house, and the defendant did not enter the house, ② the mother of the defendant who was the reporter at the site was not at the site, ② the defendant was not at the site, ③ the defendant, who was identified as the suspect during the process, was able to partly see that he was able to handle himself as a criminal with either speech and statement to the police, but the police did not interfere with confirming the facts of the report. ④ The police did not request the defendant to find the mother who was the victim about the contents of the report, and the defendant was able to visit the police to enter the house, but the defendant was able to request the police to return to the order of the police, which was the victim, to the extent that the defendant's duty would be interfere with the maintenance of order.