All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of obstruction of performance of official duties is merely against the Defendant who was a public prosecutor’s office member, and the Defendant’s act did not constitute legitimate performance of official duties. Moreover, the Defendant’s act does not constitute legitimate performance of official duties, and it constitutes legitimate self-defense, since it merely defensive act against the above G’s illegal act.

B. The Defendant asserts that the sentence imposed by the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment and additional collection) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the said sentence is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, namely, ① the Defendant found in the office of duty at the Incheon District Prosecutors’ Office on April 20, 2013 and gave him/her to take care of the fact that he/she administered phiphones. ② The employees of the office of duty in question directed the Defendant to the effect that he/she would contact the Defendant with him/her again if he/she returns to the Republic of Korea under the direction of the public prosecutor in charge, and ③ However, the Defendant requested the employees of the office of duty to immediately detain him/her, by making a call to the police and the fire station using a cell phone, and called his/her family members, etc. at time, and did not leave the office of duty for a long time and did not take care of the police officer and the fire station, and the Defendant still remains in the office of duty for several additional purposes on April 21, 2013.