All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant merely committed a mistake of facts or of misapprehending legal principles in the judgment of the court below, where the police officers tried to see the open will of the Defendant and move the Defendant into the open free will, and they did not commit a crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, and the instant duties do not constitute a crime of interference with business, which is protected as an unlawful act of interference with business. Meanwhile, the instant duties do not constitute a crime of obstruction of performance of official duties because the instant duties were not legitimate or illegal arrest acts constituted an unlawful act of obstruction of business. Even if the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate social rules, the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate social rules. However, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the charges.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (a fine of three million won) is deemed to be unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The Defendant stated that the lower court acknowledged the facts charged at the lower court’s court’s court to the effect that the Defendant did not have any intention to interfere with the performance of official duties or to injure the public interest by making it more time in the trial.

However, the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence and records submitted by the court below, that is, the defendant denied the facts charged at the court below's first time, and stated that he recognized the facts charged at the 6th day of the court below, which was after the defendant entered the court below's first trial with his defense counsel, and the defendant stated to the effect that it would be reasonable that the investigation agency would act against the defendant, although he acted against him to defend his body, and that all the damaged police officers made a concrete and consistent statement on the part, degree, circumstance, and circumstance that the defendant was assaulted by the defendant at the investigation agency, the scene photograph at the time of the case, the injury to G by the damaged police officer, and the written diagnosis