The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The police officers mismisunderstanding the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles (a interference with the performance of official duties) confirmed the existence of a singing room, etc. related to the violation of the Food Sanitation Act by entering the third floor of the building indicated in the facts charged after obtaining the consent of the defendant, and entering the third floor of the building indicated in the facts charged. This constitutes the commencement of a lawful voluntary investigation, and thus

Even if there is a right to enter the third floor in order to continuously secure additional evidence.

In addition, since the defendant was engaged in restaurant business on the second and third floors of the above building, police officers had the authority to enter the third floor, which is the defendant's place of business, pursuant to Article 7 (2) of the Act on the Execution of Police Officers' Duties.

Nevertheless, the Defendant committed an assault as described in the facts charged in the process of setting up against the police officer’s illegal search.

In light of the above legal principles, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to be sentenced to an unfair sentencing (amounting to KRW 3,00,000) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle or mistake of facts

A. On July 15, 2017, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant received 112 reports stating that “an alcoholic beverage is sold and singing in Cda located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun” around July 15, 2017, and received a request for confirmation on the site from the police officer J of the Sound Police Station affiliated with the said site, the police officer, and the police officer requesting confirmation on the site from K to the said site, and the Defendant did not report the business registration certificate only. The Defendant will have his/her singular tablet up until his/her home.

3 The 3th floor is “the 3rd floor”, and the above J’s arms were not stated in the indictment of this case as “the use of the arms by the victim J”, and the prosecutor only prosecuted the defendant I and G as a crime of obstructing the defendant’s execution of official duties, and the above act against J is a crime of obstructing the execution of official duties.