The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. As to the summary of the grounds of appeal, the court below which found the facts charged and convicted the defendant, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, even though the judicial police officer's request for the measurement of drinking alcohol was made in an illegal arrest with respect to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of measurement), there was an error in the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

가. 폭행에 대하여 피고인은 피해자 E가 피고인의 팔을 잡으면서 피고인이 ‘D’으로 들어가려고 하는 것을 방해하기에 이를 뿌리쳤거나 살짝 밀쳤을 뿐이라고 주장하나, 원심 및 당심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정들 즉, 피해자는 경찰 조사 당시부터 피고인이 자신의 멱살을 잡고 발로 자신의 배부분을 1회 걷어찼다고 진술하여 폭행 횟수와 피해 부위를 일관되고 구체적으로 진술한 점, 피고인이 피해자로부터 팔을 잡힌 상태였다면 발을 써서 피해자를 폭행하였을 가능성이 있는 점 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인이 피해자를 폭행하였다고 봄이 상당하므로 피고인의 이 부분 주장은 이유 없다.

B. As to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (recognition refusal), the Defendant did not drink, but did not drive, and the police officer demanded voluntary movement for the purpose of assault investigation and requested the Defendant to sign and seal a letter of arrest on a flagrant offender at the inter-Korean police station. Thus, the Defendant refused to affix the seal, and there was no procedure such as notification of the doctrine, and thus, the above arrest was unlawful, and the Defendant did not have a duty to respond to the demand for measurement of drinking level. Thus, the Defendant is aware of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court.