The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, when the police officers arrive at the scene, the defendant had already been in peace after committing the crime of habitual fraud and obstruction of business, and thus, the arrest of the police officer on the act of committing an act of committing an act of committing an offense was illegal because the time and location close to the crime is not recognized, and thus, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges under the presumption that the arrest of the person in the act of committing an act of committing

B. Although the Defendant did not commit an assault or injury to police officers I, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

C. The lower court’s sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the term "person who is latter to commit a crime" as defined in Article 211 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to cases where it is evident from the standpoint of the person who arrests him/her that he/she is an offender immediately after the commission of the crime. "after the commission of the crime," is interpreted as "after the commission of the crime," and "after the commission of the crime," and "after the commission of the crime, after the commission of the crime, it is interpreted as "after the commission of the crime," and therefore, it can be viewed as a flagrant offender if it is clearly acknowledged that there is a evidence of a crime

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Do926, Aug. 13, 1993; 2005Do7158, Feb. 10, 2006). In the instant case, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant entered the Gangnam-gu Seoul E-gu Seoul E-style House on August 8, 2012, and committed an act of unretakeing and interfering with business.