The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment of the court below (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant as to the obstruction of performance of official duties among the facts charged of this case.

In the case of assault and intimidation against multiple public officials who perform the same official duties, multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties are established according to the number of public officials who perform the same official duties, and in the case of assault and intimidation committed in the same place at the same time and deemed as one act under the concept of society, multiple crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties are crimes of mutual concurrence.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, each of the charges of obstruction of performance of official duties among the charges of this case is deemed to have been committed by police officers on the same opportunity at the same place, and the charges of obstruction of official duties under Article 40 of the Criminal Act, and the charges of this case are deemed to have been committed on the ground that the charges of obstruction of official duties were committed by police officers, and each of the charges of obstruction of official duties, and the charges of obstruction of official duties were committed by police officers under Article 40 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the court below omitted the application of Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties on the ground that each of the above crimes constitutes concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the number of crimes of obstruction of official duties.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which rendered an ex officio reversal prior to the obstruction of performance of official duties, and the court below rendered a single sentence on the ground that each of the facts charged and the remainder of the offense of insult are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.