All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and by a fine of two thousand won.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) There was no misunderstanding of facts against the victim P of the first instance judgment as stated in this part of the facts charged.

(Assault Part) Of the facts charged, it is different from the fact that the part of the charge was made by the police officer on the right side of the R by hand.

(Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties) Of this part of the facts charged, the police officers belonging to Q District Armed Forces failed to wear the same.

the police officer's face in hand is not true. It is not true that the police officer's face was quied with the hand saw.

(2) Of the charges of this part of the judgment of the second instance, it is different from the fact that the police officer’s head was displayed on the surface of metal materials.

(2012. 5. 14.자 공무집행방해 부분). 이 부분 공소사실 중 경찰관 G, H에게 욕을 하고, 손으로 G의 멱살을 잡아 밀치고, 발로 H의 허벅지를 걷어찼다는 것은 사실과 다르다

On June 12, 2012, the obstruction of the performance of official duties is the part concerning the obstruction of the performance of official duties.

Each sentence of unfair sentencing (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, 2 months: fine for 7,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Before determining the Defendant’s assertion of ex officio, the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of appeal are consolidated in the trial. The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are in a concurrent crime relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be sentenced at the same time under Article 38 of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court of first instance cannot be maintained any more.

However, despite such reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this will be examined.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by each court below regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s assaulted the Victim P as stated in this part of the facts charged, and the Defendant’s fault on the part of the police officer R by hand.