The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Progress of litigation;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, and sentenced the Defendant a suspended sentence of two years and a community service order of 240 hours in six months of imprisonment.

B. The judgment of the court below before remanding the case was appealed on the grounds of mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing.

The trial before remanded that the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by the police officer.

보기 어렵고, 피고인에 대한 체포가 그 요건을 갖추지 못하여 적법한 공무집행으로 볼 수 없어 설령 그 과정에서 피고인이 체포에 대항하여 경찰관의 정강이를 발로 찼다고

Even if this cannot be seen as a interference with the performance of official duties, the judgment of the court below convicting the charged facts of this case is reversed, and the defendant was acquitted.

(c)

The Prosecutor appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance before remanding the judgment, on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, and the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the judgment before remanding.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. Legal principles are that the defendant's act of misunderstanding the legal principles committed a dispute with G while engaging in a conflict with G, not an assault that occurred during the performance of official duties, and even if during the performance of official duties, it cannot be said that the chest was committed to the extent that it interferes with the performance of official duties once.

In addition, G's arrest of the defendant as a flagrant offender is illegal arrest because it does not meet the requirements for the arrest of the defendant in the act of crime, so the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act due to resistance against illegal arrest.

B. The Defendant, who is aware of the fact, did not agree to walk the part of the police officer G’s lecture.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 240 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Determination on the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) As to the public official performing the duties of obstructing the performance of official duties under Article 136 of the Criminal Act.