The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, this judgment is delivered against the defendant.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles)

A. As to interference with the performance of official duties, the police did not appear in the process of arresting a man with no name, who was a member of the police team (hereinafter “person with no name”) above, and the defendant did not have awareness of assaulting the police officer and obstructing the arrest of a person with no name, and the defendant’s behavior constitutes a legitimate act by resistance against the police officer’s performance of official duties.

B. As to the damage to public documents, the defendant was illegally arrested, and the police officer did not know the facts alleged by the defendant in the suspect interrogation protocol, and thus, the protocol to examine the suspect does not have the value to be protected as public documents.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. The crime of obstructing the performance of official duties under Article 136 of the Criminal Act is established when an assault or intimidation is committed against the public official performing the official duties, and the assault here is sufficient to exercise the force against the person, and does not necessarily have to be done against his body. Moreover, it does not require the result of obstructing the performance of duties specifically as an abstract dangerous offender (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do6725, Oct. 28, 2005, etc.). Meanwhile, in relation to the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, the term "performance of duties" does not refer only to the case where the public official directly performs the necessary act, but also to the case where the public official is in the position of performing his duties. Accordingly, it is inappropriate to discuss the process of performing duties individually separately, and it is reasonable to understand that the process of performing duties is a series of acts comprehensively and comprehensively.

The Supreme Court on March 29, 2018.