The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. With respect to mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant, who suffers from stimulative disorder, did not report 112 as an active intent to actually cause a phenomenon that organized violence and ships, etc. drive their own, and to protect their body, and did not report with awareness and intent to interfere with the performance of official duties through deceptive scheme.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties by fraudulent means is established in cases where the other party misleads the other party, misleads the other party, and uses the land, thereby obstructing the specific and practical execution of official duties.

(Supreme Court Decision 2015Do17297 Decided January 28, 2016). Therefore, in a case where a false or false reporting act causes the other party to commit an offense, which led the public official, to misunderstand that the offense was committed, and the public official withdraws response measures that would not have been known of such circumstances, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties by fraudulent means is established by hindering specific and realistic performance of official duties, thereby obstructing the performance of official duties in a specific and realistic manner.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2016Do9958 Decided October 13, 2016). According to evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the Defendant filed a false report on April 14, 2019 that “emergency rescue request is made to a cellular phone in the subway train near the Myeonkdong Station in the subway Station in the subway Station in the subway Station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the subway station in the 112 Police Office, the Defendant ordered the Defendant to dispatch the site to the district unit in response to the said report, from the time of the said report until April 25, 2019 to April 25, 200: