1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant is not guilty; 3. The defendant shall notify the defendant of the summary of the judgment.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal pertains to the instant crime of this case where the victim did not observe the procedure regulations on the crackdown and forced arrest of the defendant, etc., thereby doing unlawful official duties. It is merely an injury to the victim in the course of setting up against the defendant.

Therefore, even if the defendant's act constitutes self-defense and thus illegal, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is Defendant A is the driver of Trper, and the victim C is a public official working in C of a shower service.

On January 10, 2013, the Defendant stopped in accordance with the direction of the victim while driving a bitr vehicle on the front of the new site of the Hansi Hospital located in the Hansi-gu, Hansi-si on January 10, 2013.

The victim notified the victim of the violation of the restriction on the operation of the vehicle, and the accused is waiting for a public official with the control equipment so that he does not comply with the crackdown, and the victim forced the defendant to board the vehicle of the victim who was standing in the police station.

The Defendant, with left hand, blicked the right side of the victim twice, and blicked the victim's breath in hand and boomed the victim's blick.

As a result, the defendant puts the victim into a diversified scopic scopical scopical scopic and scopic scopic s

B. The lower court, based on the following, determined by the lower court: (a) the Defendant is a flagrant offender in violation of the Road Act; (b) anyone may arrest an flagrant offender without a warrant pursuant to Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Act; and (c) the Defendant was likely to flee or destroy evidence since he/she attempted to leave the scene without complying with the restriction on operation at the time; and (d) the Defendant was likely to flee or destroy evidence.