The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The degree of insult by the Defendant of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is minor, and the police officer identified the name and telephone number of the Defendant, so there was no need to arrest the Defendant in the act of committing the crime.

The police officer's arrest of the defendant in the act of insult is illegal, and since the defendant committed an act of entering the facts charged of obstruction of performance of official duties and damage to public goods in order to resist the illegal arrest, the illegality is dismissed as it constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, any person may arrest a flagrant offender without a warrant (Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Act). In order to arrest a flagrant offender, the court below held that the Defendant’s act was unlawful based on the following facts: (a) the punishment of the act; (b) the current and hourly contact of the crime; and (c) the necessity of arrest in addition to the apparentness of the crime and the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Do3029, Jan. 26, 199); and (d) the requirement for the arrest of a flagrant offender should be determined based on the circumstances at the time of arrest; and (b) the judgment of the investigative body on the requirements is not deemed unreasonable in light of the empirical rule; (c) the arrest of a flagrant offender at the time of arrest is not deemed unlawful (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do8184, Nov. 29, 2012).

the court has duly adopted and investigated.