The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles have passed since the commission of violence against the spouse of the defendant was terminated, and despite the fact that there was no concern about escape and destruction of evidence in the situation that the defendant was diving at the place of residence at the time, demanding voluntary accompanying of the defendant or arresting the defendant as an offender in the act of violence constitutes an illegal arrest which does not meet the requirements for arrest in the act of violence and thereby does not constitute a crime of obstructing the execution of official duties. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, thereby finding the defendant guilty of the facts charged

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year of the suspended sentence of six months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below's judgment as to the assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles, namely, ① a police officer D or E was sent to the defendant's residence after receiving 112 report on a domestic violence crime from the victim, and confirmed the victim's damage situation at the same time, and entered the defendant's residence to confirm the perpetrator and on-site situation. ② The above police officer went to the defendant's residence for the confirmation of the perpetrator; ② the defendant was sent to the defendant's entrance; ③ the police officers used the defendant's desire to take place; ③ the police officers were arrested the defendant as an offender of the crime of interference with the performance of official duties; and ③ the police officers sent to the scene in accordance with the procedure for the performance of duties under 112 report; and the defendant was using legitimate search procedure necessary for resolution of the case. As such, the defendant was obstructing the execution of official duties due to an act of obstructing the arrest of a police officer and obstructing the execution of official duties.