The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. As to Defendant 1’s mistake or misapprehension of the legal doctrine that interferes with the performance of special official duties (guilty part), according to Article 1(2) of the Police Officers’ Duties Execution Act, the police officer’s authority should be exercised to the minimum extent necessary to perform his/her duties and shall not be abused. According to Article 8(2)3 of the Police Agency’s Guidelines for Traffic Control by the National Police Agency, a police officer in charge of traffic control shall not engage in dangerous conduct to prevent the front body of an escape vehicle.

In this case, the defendant tried to turn on the police officer who was damaged by the intention of escape without traffic control, and there was an accident that the victim police officer attempted to prevent the defendant's misuse and the defendant attempted to stop the stong on the stong on the stong on the stong of the stong, and there was a conflict between the defendant's attempt to move off the stong on the stong on the stong on the stong.

In light of the degree of violation of the laws and regulations of the defendant and the risk of the act of the victimized police officer, the act of the victimized police officer violates the principle of appropriateness or proportionality in performing their duties, as prescribed by the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, and prevents the front of the escapeing vehicle from carrying out its body as prohibited by the above traffic control guidelines. Thus, this cannot be deemed a legitimate execution of official duties subject to the protection of the crime of interference with the performance of official duties, and therefore, it cannot be said that the crime of interference with the execution of special official duties

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the crime of obstructing the performance of special duties, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) With regard to the fact-misunderstanding or misapprehension of the legal doctrine on the injury inflicted by interfering with the performance of special official duties (the part not guilty for the reason), the Defendant is at the rapid speed of the Defendant’s earth and sand in close vicinity to the victimized police officers.