The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the court below found the defendant not guilty of the charges of obstruction of performance of official duties against the defendant on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender after notifying the defendant of the summary of the alleged crime, the reason for arrest, the right to appoint a defense counsel, etc., and giving him an opportunity to defend him. G is consistently stating not only the investigation agency but also the court, that he consistently made a statement that the above contents were notified to the defendant at the time of the arrest of the defendant, ② the arrest of a flagrant offender, ② the arrest of a flagrant offender, ③ the defendant and his police officer had not received the above notification from the police officer at the time of the arrest of the defendant, ③ although the defendant and his police officer argued that there was no fact that there was no such notification from the police officer at the time of the arrest of the defendant, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact and making a false statement that there was no such fact.

2. Determination

가. 이 사건 공소사실의 요지 피고인은 2013. 2. 2. 01:40경 서울 영등포구 D에 있는 ‘E’ 클럽에서, 폭행 사건이 발생하였다는 112 신고를 받고 출동한 서울영등포경찰서 F지구대 소속 G 경위가 피고인의 일행인 H을 현행범 체포하려고 하자 “개새끼야, 짭새는 다 똑같아, 너 같은 놈들은 잘라 버릴 거야, 병신 새끼들”이라고 욕설을 하면서 손으로 G의 멱살을 잡아 흔들어 경찰관의 112 신고 업무 등에 관한 정당한 직무 집행을 방해하였다.

B. The lower court’s determination is as follows: (a) according to G sent to the site at the time, and according to the J’s statement, both the Defendant and his/her first executive H were arrested as a flagrant offender in the crime of assault against I; (b) the arrest of a flagrant offender (the trial record of 8-10 pages).