The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the police officer F’s statement and part of H’s statement on the grounds of appeal, the Defendant, who took advantage of the mobile phone in order to record F’s h’s hand to the police officer F, who controlled the Defendant’s drinking, brought the Defendant’s cell phone to h’s cellular phone floor was reduced. After that, the Defendant used the F’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’, and arrested the Defendant as the current offender, and at the time of arrest, the Defendant refused the criminal facts and arrested the Defendant as the current offender.

In light of this, there is a concern that the punishment of the act, the current situation of the crime is in contact with time, the apparentness of the crime and the necessity of arrest, i.e., escape or destruction of evidence.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the defendant's arrest against the defendant cannot be seen as legitimate execution of official duties because it is difficult to view it as legitimate execution of official duties because it does not meet the requirements for the arrest of the flagrant offender, even if the defendant committed an assault like the facts charged, it is erroneous in the

2. Determination

A. Relevant legal principles 1) Interference with the performance of official duties under Article 136 of the Criminal Act is established only when the performance of official duties is legitimate. The lawful performance of official duties here refers to not only the act within the abstract authority of a public official but also the act meeting the legal requirements and methods concerning specific performance of duties. Thus, the act of assault or intimidation against the public official who performs the act lacking such legitimacy was committed.

Even if an act of arresting a flagrant offender cannot be deemed to have interfered with the performance of official duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do9926, Feb. 12, 2009; 2013Do8844, Feb. 18, 2016). In addition, if an act of arresting a flagrant offender is forced to be out of lawful performance of official duties and illegal arrest, the act of arresting the flagrant offender goes against the order to escape the arrest.