The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles) and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, although the defendant was found to have obstructed the legitimate execution of duties by assaulting and threatening police officers E at the time of committing the crime in this case.

2. Determination

A. The crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties is established by assaulting or threatening a public official performing his duties. The assault at this time is an act of exercising an unlawful tangible power against a public official, and is not directly, indirectly, or indirectly, and the intimidation refers to a notice of any harm and injury that may cause fear to the other party. However, the assault or intimidation is against a public official performing his duties by nature and must interfere with the performance of his duties.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do13968 Decided June 24, 2010 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do13968, Jun. 24, 2010). In the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, intimidation refers to an act of notifying harm with intent to cause fear to the other party, and the content of harm and injury notified should be taken into account various circumstances at the time of the act, such as its circumstance, surrounding circumstances at the time of the act, the offender’s tendency, the degree of friendship with the other party, and the mutual relation between the offender and the other party, etc., and if the intimidation is insignificant and the other party is not open to the contrary, it does not constitute intimidation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4

The Defendant’s act at issue in the facts charged in the instant case refers to E of the victimized police officers, who received a report by the Defendant, and ① “The investigation of the victims in the Republic of Korea is immediately harmful to the victim.”