All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 9,000,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (the first instance court: the fine of KRW 7 million, the second instance court: the fine of KRW 5 million) that the public prosecutor sentenced to the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

B. (1) The Defendant, at the time of erroneous determination of facts (as to the facts stated in paragraph (1) 1-b of the judgment of the court below), found Defendant (1) guilty of this part of the facts charged, even though he only saw that he only caused a police officer to see “Ne, Dog, Dog,” and that he was guilty of this part of the facts charged. The judgment of the court below of the second instance is erroneous by

(2) The sentence imposed by the second court below on the defendant is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Regarding the judgment of the court below, the defendant filed each appeal against the judgment of the court below as the defendant filed each appeal against the judgment of the court of appeal against the judgment of the court of appeal. However, as long as each crime of the judgment of the court below is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below should be rendered concurrently and a sentence should be imposed. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. The judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts (as to the crime No. 1-B of the judgment of the court below in the second instance) is based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, that is, the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below, namely, ① the Inspector I expressed specifically that he interfered with his official duties by taking the defendant's great desire and pushing his body in his hand, etc. ② the testimony given by the witness of the above situation at the time also corresponds to the F's statement and the statement of the I, ③ the defendant is in accord with the I's statement in the investigative agency, ③ even though he was unable to keep accurate memory at the time of sobrithing, the defendant is satisfy with his arms."