The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, a prosecution against assault, which is the primary charge, is instituted.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the absence of awareness as to whether the other party is a public official or not, the Defendant committed the same act as the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, and committed one time with the J’s repeated words and actions, which constitutes a legitimate act, and thus constitutes a defensive act, and thus, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty is erroneous by mistake of facts

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio, the name of the previous indictment, applicable provisions of Acts, and the name of the offense primarily committed shall be deemed to be "Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties," and the applicable provisions of Acts shall be deemed to be "Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act," and Article 1 of the facts charged

Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, “The facts charged are as follows.”

As stated in the paragraph, an application for changes in indictment was filed, and since this court permitted it, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

B. The term “public official” under the Criminal Act concerning an assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles refers to a person engaged in the affairs of the State or a local government or an equivalent public corporation based on the legal basis and whose contents of labor are not limited to mechanical physical or physical.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do14484, Jan. 27, 2011; 2015Do3430, May 29, 2015).